Quoting James Morris: | On Thu, 8 Jun 2006, David Miller wrote: | | > > Understood. Please, anyone, disregard or un-apply the previous | > > UDP-Lite patch. A revised patch will be prepared and posted as soon | > > as testing permits. | > | > Nobody is going to integrate your patch anywhere, don't worry. | > You make it clear that once you toss this piece of code over | > the wall, you'll disappear. | | Having dealt with more than enough code thrown over the wall in recent | times, I agree.
I understand the points of both of you well enough. But how come this is interpreted as saying I'd "toss this piece of code over the wall"? I can understand getting tired of cowboy coding jobs, but there is a misunderstanding here. Of course do and will I maintain that code and every issue related it. I have been maintaining, improving, testing this code for 9 months. The protocol spec (RFC 3828) was developed at University of Aberdeen, and there is continuing research into UDP-Lite here, i.e. it is not a `dead' project. That is why I held back regarding the IPv6 port: I can ensure that this (IPv4) code is up to standard and to date, but am lacking the required additional time to implement the same for IPv6. I am trying to contact people to help with the port, but for the moment I will take responsibility only for the IPv4 version. And if there is someone `well-known and respected' who is interested in taking this code over, I would only be happy for him/her to do this. But I won't simply `disappear' :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
