On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 09:30:20AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > That's for the maintainers to decide. If they agree it has worth, maybe > > it's a good idea to answer "How". > > Al and Christoph said essentially the same thing and they generally > are considered the general area filesystem maintainers. > > This kind of thing does not appear to have come up before and > so procedurally you guys are setting are attempting to set > a precedent. > > All I know is that doing it the way you are doing seems like a bad > idea. Not discussing things or even the reason you can't discuss them > seems foolish and leaves no one satisfied. > > Maybe there are good reasons but so far this whole thing just stinks. > > When all of the pieces are public how can having secret veiled reasons > make sense? > > And if secret magic consultations with lawyers are going to be invoked > I expect we should have a Signed-off-by from those lawyers. ;-) Matthew's idea of checking with SFLC seems to me to have some merit. I am looking into this from my end. Of course, you and Al and Christoph have just as much standing to ask SFLC as do I, and perhaps more. 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
