On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 12:31 PM Alex Markuze <amarkuze@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is a bad patch, I don't appreciate partial fixes that introduce
> unnecessary complications to the code, and it conflicts with the
> complete fix in the other thread.
Alex, and I don't appreciate the unnecessary complications you
introduce to the Ceph contribution process!
The mistake you made in your first review ("will end badly") is not a
big deal; happens to everybody - but you still don't admit the mistake
and you ghosted me for a week. But then saying you don't appreciate
the work of somebody who found a bug and posted a simple fix is not
good communication. You can say you prefer a different patch and
explain the technical reasons; but saying you don't appreciate it is
quite condescending.
Now back to the technical facts:
- What exactly about my patch is "bad"?
- Do you believe my patch is not strictly an improvement?
- Why do you believe my fix is only "partial"?
- What unnecessary complications are introduced by my two-line patch
in your opinion?
- What "other thread"? I can't find anything on LKML and ceph-devel.
Max
