On Sun, 2019-10-06 at 10:31 +0200, Mischa Baars wrote: > On Sat, 2019-10-05 at 09:50 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > It's not really a case of quid pro quo, if someone gets removed, > > something else can stay. I'd argue that the floppy driver is > > probably > > used by orders of magnitude more people than the packet writing > > code, > > and as such that makes it much more important to maintain. > > I'm not into time-reversal, if that is what you mean?! I love > unilinear time and causal computers! > > Regards, > Mischa. > Hello Mischa Something is not making sense here. If this will not be an open source project and not released then why not simply snapshot the kernel as is now and go ahead. Maintain it yourself, issue solved. No need to harp on the packet writing code support anymore. Many companies have taken a snap of the kernel to use for storage arrays and then made changes and did not release the entire solution as open source. You said "Yes, I've written the the code myself, thank you. It's prototype hardware and it's not intended as an open source software project. It is therefore not going to be released to the general public. When it's finished, and it isn't at the moment, it's hopefully going to be part of your future processors. " Regards Laurence Oberman
