On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 12:42 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02 2006, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 06:17 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 06:36:17PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > >>Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote:
> > > >>>commit 42935656914b813c99f91cbac421fe677a6f34ab
> > > >>>tree d37a0d20998f4d87a4bd014300f707c3852ef5f9
> > > >>>parent 82d56e6d2e616bee0e712330bad06b634f007a46
> > > >>>author David Brownell <[email protected]> Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:36:32 -0800
> > > >>>committer Dominik Brodowski <[email protected]> Wed, 01 Mar 2006
> > >
> > > >>Why was this not CC'd to the IDE maintainer, and linux-ide?
> > >
> > > > For it is trivial, PCMCIA-related and my time is very limited these days.
> > >
> > > That's pathetic. You couldn't even CC linux-kernel on your answer. And
> > > this is not even the first or second time you've been asked to CC a
> > > maintainer.
> >
> > I personally don't consider that maintainers have a right to demand
> > CC's. Sure it's polite and good to CC them, but that's not the same as
> > having the right to demand this.
>
> How do you expect the patch to be picked up, if you don't cc the
> maintainer?
in this case brodo IS the ide-cs maintainer arguably ;)
but if you do a kernel wide change (say add a parameter to a function)
being forced to look up 5000 different maintainers is nonsense.
sure sending it to lkml and some bigger lists is good for that, but
still.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]