On Thu, 2024-11-14 at 16:30 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > My approach/attitude is based on actions from Linus and/or what I expect > he wants me to do, so let's bring him in to give him a chance to state > if I went to far here. Umm, no. You own your attitude and communication behaviour. That's not Linus's fault. Maybe he asked you to pay attention to how fixes enter mainline, maybe he didn't, I don't know or don't even care. But the fact is that for a very long time now pretty much every single interaction we've had has been in one way or the other you complaining about how I/we did something. It really does feel like all you care about is piling on more pressure. Also, FTR, I wasn't even involved in the patch. > Well, Linus is known to have no problem at all with picking up fixes > straight from lists if there are good reasons (like the unlucky timing > we have here), as long as that does not become the norm. That approach > was actually used in the situation I pointed to, as it really is quite > similar. And we've obviously done that in the past. For _important_ fixes. A single user reported this, was able to use an older kernel while it's getting fixed, and it's on a device that's somewhere around 15 years old at this point. But you seem to think it's *free* to do this. It isn't! It needs coordination, asking, it needs to be managed, etc. > > The problem is, that bring this up in situations like this is making the > "maintainer burnout" problem worse. I hate that and feed sorry for that. I don't buy it any more. That worked a long time ago, but it's clearly the only thing you ever do, and you seem to be pretty comfortable doing it over and over and over again. johannes
