Aloha Serge;
On the 02.08.2010 20:08, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Christian Stroetmann (stroetmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxx):
Aloha James, Aloha Kees;
Ont the 02.08.2010 08:57, Kees Cook wrote:
On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 04:41:08PM +1000, James Morris wrote:
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010, Kees Cook wrote:
Well, at least I'll have something for my summit presentation again.
On the other hand, it's rather hard for me to defend against a private NAK.
A private NAK against a company's developer's OK
Where is the difference private and company? I thought that it
doesn't matter who and what a developer is, and where she/he comes
from.
That's not what private means in this case. A private nak is one made
in a private email, so that the list - and the submitter - can't see the
rationale. It is problematic because it doesn't really allow the other
party to address the objection.
(No big deal - Christoph has since responded in public.)
Sorry, but AFAIK the NAK by Christoph that I meant was written in a
public e-mail with full context to the LSM mailing list some weeks ago
around the end of June (23 June 2010?!) and I thought Kees meant this
NAK. :D
But thanks for trying to clearify the case.
Sorry Kees, if you indeed meant with private NAK a NAK made in a private
e-mail.
Have fun
Christian Stroetmann
--
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
