On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 07:17:27PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 09:42:50AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > 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. > > OK, enough. Any further communication on that topic should be filtered > through lawyers, since you apparently refuse to provide details of rationale > for your changes due to some kind of legal issues. Hmmm... Sorry you feel that way. I had hoped to avoid having you deal directly with lawyers, but perhaps that is the way that it must be. If so, welcome to my world. > Whether you have a reason for such behaviour or not, continuing that thread > is obviously pointless. If you want a useful review, it is up to you to > figure out the procedure that > (a) would allow answering such questions when asked by those who > will be reviewing it > (b) satisfy whatever legal concerns you might have about (a) > (c) satisfy whatever legal concerns said reviewers might have > regarding the procedure in question, whatever that procedure turns out > to be. > (d) satisfy whatever legal concerns employers of said reviewers > might have. > > Until then all you are doing is busily making an ass of yourself in public > and possibly compounding whatever legal issues you might have. This would not be the first time I have made an ass of myself in public, and if things go as they normally do, it would not be the last.` Unfortunately, I do not believe that this problem is going to go away on its own. 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
