On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 09:55:06AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 08:38:15AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 09:08:34AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 07:39:19AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 07:21:19AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > Bringing the patch to a public mailing list is a waste of time until > > > > > there's a reliable description of the problem you're trying to solve. > > > > > > > > Please see the original patch. It does describes what it is doing. > > > > > > "What", but not "Why". Which is only acceptable in GNU changelogs ;-) > > > > ;-) > > > > > Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre > > > > Given your affiliation, you should have access to people with whom > > you can have a meaningful conversation on the non-technical issues, > > but without putting the Linux community at risk. > > Indeed I do have access to lawyers. But what use is that? I could > presumably get an opinion for myself that I would not then be able to > share outside of Intel. I am glad you understand our situation, then! ;-) > Can't you get the SFLC to issue a public legal opinion for you? Or maybe > the Linux Foundation? I have no clue whether this would work, but it is certainly worth exploring. Thank you for the tip!!! Thanx, Paul -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
