On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 09:31:01AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 00:22 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>
> > I do not understand what the fuss is about. We are pretty far in release
> > process (rc6 is about to be cut I'd expect) and we have an issue that
> > for all practical purposes kills the box on resume. Yes, I want action
> > to be swift in this case and (unless author or maintainer - who were
> > CCed on the email - have otehr solutiuon) the offending commit to be
> > reverted. If it was rc1 or rc2 or 3 I'd feel differently.
>
> Oh, I don't disagree that swift action is good.
>
> I just think that it's a matter of courtesy that should be independent
> from the release cycle to ask the author/maintainer by default, not as a
> second thought ("unless [...] have other solution"). You can always CC
> Linus and ask him to revert if you don't get a response.
>
> What's wrong with that? It doesn't actually delay the action, but it
> makes the discussion much more friendly and cooperative instead of
> giving the author and maintainer the feeling that their opinion only
> matters as a second thought.
>
I think you are reading too much into who was addressed directly and who
was "only" CCed... OK, next time (which I hope won't happen :) ) I'll
just address everyone directly. Will that work?
--
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
