--- Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Luben Tuikov wrote: > > You have to make a clarification: "the way event processing works" means > > the way it works after you removed all of event processing from my code the > > way I wrote it, and added a very naive "event processing" if it can be > > called that. > > > > Event processing seems to work just fine with my version of my code the > > way I maintain it, and the way you had it originally on this list. > > > > Just clarifying in case someone gets confused reading the code. > > And we were all waiting breathlessly for this clarification too, I > assure you. > > In the dictionary under the phrase "sore loser", it says "see: Luben" Sorry that you feel this way Jeff and that your have to resort to personal attacks. It makes me doubt your professionalism. Merely on technical grounds and the fact that the code still bears my copyright, I wanted to mention that all those bugs being posted against aic94xx and the SAS Stack, and "fixed" by Bottomley and LTC are not due to the reason that I wrote the code with bugs, but due to the fact of Bottomley blocking the code from going in, then him and LTC removing large portions of perfectly well working and tested code (SAS analysed and complient) with their own versions and interpretations, only later to "fix" the very code they submitted as a substition of a perfectly working code I wrote that they removed. For example, event management is one such: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=115895097501842&w=2 Another example, commit 2908d778ab3e244900c310974e1fc1c69066e450, http://kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=2908d778ab3e244900c310974e1fc1c69066e450 has things in it like this: ... o Preliminary expander support for aic94xx ... All the while aic94xx and the SAS Stack had always supported expanders. There is just a lot of misleading information, and I don't want the casual reader to believe that aic94xx and the SAS Stack as I posted them didn't support expanders all the while they did. And I'm sure you don't want such confusion too and as a member of the open source community will do everything in your power to disambiguate that. For example mentioning the announcement emails of the very first posting of the SAS Stack and aic94xx: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=112629423714248&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=112629509826900&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=112629509318354&w=2 The tricky point is that aic94xx and the SAS Stack were *NOT* committed into git as I had posted them, but were first _edited_ and then "fixed" by what you see in commit 2908d778ab3e244900c310974e1fc1c69066e450, http://kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=2908d778ab3e244900c310974e1fc1c69066e450 and _then_ commited into git as you'd see them starting with the commit id quoted above. Surely there are a lot of people just reading this mailing list, interested in where storage is going with Linux. You don't want to mislead them... Not to mention SATL support. I should probably post my git trees somewhere? The SAS Stack now also includes enterprise-grade per-device SATL support. I'm sure you'd enjoy that the most. ;-) > > Jeff > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
