Kevin 'ldir' Darbyshire-Bryant <l...@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> writes:
> I have to call it a day. I have no idea why the patches are becoming > corrupt and hence how to fix it, it’s probably something Apple has > done to git, or maybe MS to my email server. Or maybe it's just that your editor saves things with the wrong type of line ending (if you're on a Mac)? > Sadly I also think that the only way this patch/functionality will > ever be acceptable is if someone else writes it, where they or their > company can take the credit/blame. Not sure why you would think so. > I tried very hard to approach the process of upstream submission in a > positive way, seeking advice & guidance in the form of RFC patches, > many rounds later I feel they’re further away from acceptance than > ever. Not sure why you'd think that either; I thought you were rather close, actually... > Clearly it is not desired functionality/code otherwise it would have > been written by now and I cannot face another 3 rounds of the same > thing for act_ctinfo user space, the x_tables/nf_tables kernel helper > to store the DSCP in the first place and the user space code to handle > that. > > As a rank outsider, amateur coder I shall leave it that I’ve found the > process completely discouraging. The professionals are of course paid > to deal with this. It's up to you if you want to continue, of course; but honestly, I'm not actually sure what it is you are finding hard to "deal with"? No one has told you "go away, this is junk"; you've gotten a few suggestions for improvements, most of which you have already fixed. So what, exactly, is the problem? :) -Toke
