message --
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 18:24:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mark Hahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Linux Kernel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Russell King forks ARM Linux.
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> him, but he has cut off all commutations. So starting
> "Erik" == Erik Mouw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Erik> I have taken the role as flame fighter and I have written a
Erik> summary which you can read at:
Erik> http://www-ict.its.tudelft.nl/~erik/flamewar.txt
There is one small problem with the solution advocated at the end of
that page. Th
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:58:35 -0700, Howell, David P wrote:
> My 2 cents.
>
> I don't read this mail list for this type of rubbish either. The technical
> detail of this thread is all that seems appropriate here, not the issue
> between George and Russell. I'd be embarrassed if I were either of
Howell, David P writes:
> I don't read this mail list for this type of rubbish either. The technical
> detail of this thread is all that seems appropriate here, not the issue
> between George and Russell. I'd be embarrassed if I were either of them,
> the way that they have presented themselves
rance
Cc: Linux Kernel
Subject: Re: Russell King forks ARM Linux.
Well, this sucks.
I am not sure how you both came to this impass, but it really is quite
unacceptable. I think there are several problems here:
No maintainer should cut off contribution from an entire
company to a platfor
On 28 Sep 2000, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> > "George" == George France <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> George> Eric Mouw from the LART group will be posting the whole thing
> George> in a little while.
> Is there a reason why this obviously personal fight between you and
> Russell needs to be mediat
> "George" == George France <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
George> Eric Mouw from the LART group will be posting the whole thing
George> in a little while.
Is there a reason why this obviously personal fight between you and
Russell needs to be mediated/judged by linux-kernel?
Jes
-
To unsubscr
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Miles Lane wrote:
> Perhaps the Linux community should draft up some
> guidelines for the job of maintainer that would include
> some mechanism for replacing a maintainer who is not
> effectively shepherding his port.
Since when it is decided by community? It's not a democ
Well, this sucks.
I am not sure how you both came to this impass, but it really is quite
unacceptable. I think there are several problems here:
No maintainer should cut off contribution from an entire
company to a platform it intends to help support and
implement.
Usually these kin
Russell King writes:
> George France writes:
[snip]
OK, so the flamewar landed over here. I have taken the role as flame
fighter and I have written a summary which you can read at:
http://www-ict.its.tudelft.nl/~erik/flamewar.txt
We are currently trying to solve this issue privately, so the
> him, but he has cut off all commutations. So starting tomorrow, we will be
> submitting patches directly to the kernel mailing list, since Russell will
uh, this will be unpleasantly familiar to anyone who
was reading the linux-usb mailing list in Dec 99,
when George said, roughly "you are all s
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 02:30:13PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> For what it's worth, the SA1100 serial driver has been registered with
> me on the Low-Density Serial Ports major (204) as /dev/ttySA0-2 (minor
> 5-7).
>
> Russ is 100% correct that different drivers shouldn't use the
> same dev
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 02:30:13PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Russ is 100% correct that different drivers shouldn't use the
> same device numbers, unless they are:
>
> a) mutually exclusive,
> b) interface compatible, *AND*
> c) handle all arbitration necessary.
This doesn't handle the watch
> heh. It'd go along very well with the current /.post:
> Kernel Fork for Big Iron?
> Posted by Hemos on Wednesday
> September 27, @04:01PM
> from the what-to-do dept.
> (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/09/27/191243&mode=thread)
>
> *sigh*
It amuses me tha
Dan Hollis wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Russell King wrote:
> > Alan Cox writes:
> > > So is there a URL with the whole discussion on. It looks like a fun read ?
> > Have a look at the linux-arm-kernel archive at
> > http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/
> > for the thread
Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author:Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Alan Cox writes:
> > > now. IMHO, today he lost it, declaring that he was going to block all
> > > e-mails from Compaq, which means he can not recieve any more ARM Linux
> > > patche
Hello Mike;
> Ok. I didn't mean to imply anything.. It just wasn't clear, and
> due to the nature of the discussion, it seemed that it might have
> been a private message..
>
No problem. I should have took more time in writing my e-mail and inserted
the headers.
Best Regards,
--George
-
T
;Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Subject: RE: Russell King forks ARM Linux.
>
>Relax. Russel posted this to a public mailing list.
Ok. I didn't mean to imply anything.. It just wasn't clear, and
due to the nature of the discussion, it s
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Russell King wrote:
> Alan Cox writes:
> > So is there a URL with the whole discussion on. It looks like a fun read ?
> Have a look at the linux-arm-kernel archive at
> http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/
> for the thread:
> Re: information request abou
: Re: Russell King forks ARM Linux.
>
>
> > now. IMHO, today he lost it, declaring that he was going to
> block all
> > e-mails from Compaq, which means he can not recieve any
> more ARM Linux
> > patches from us. I have tried every method that I know of,
>
Relax. Russel posted this to a public mailing list.
--George
> If that was a personal email from him to you (ie: not public)
> then it was very distasteful and disrespectful of you to post it
> here publically. You should have at least quoted the header
> lines to make it clear...
>
> Just my
Russell;
>
> George France writes:
> > As you probably know Russell King is the maintainer of ARM
> Linux. Him and I
> > have been debating how serial ports should be handled on an
> off for months
> > now. IMHO, today he lost it,
>
> Please note that at every instance, George has totally
>
Alan Cox writes:
> > now. IMHO, today he lost it, declaring that he was going to block all
> > e-mails from Compaq, which means he can not recieve any more ARM Linux
> > patches from us. I have tried every method that I know of, to work with
>
> So is there a URL with the whole discussion on. It
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, George France wrote:
>Greetings;
>
>As you probably know Russell King is the maintainer of ARM Linux. Him and I
>have been debating how serial ports should be handled on an off for months
>now. IMHO, today he lost it, declaring that he was going to block all
>e-mails from Co
> now. IMHO, today he lost it, declaring that he was going to block all
> e-mails from Compaq, which means he can not recieve any more ARM Linux
> patches from us. I have tried every method that I know of, to work with
So is there a URL with the whole discussion on. It looks like a fun read ?
>
George France writes:
> As you probably know Russell King is the maintainer of ARM Linux. Him and I
> have been debating how serial ports should be handled on an off for months
> now. IMHO, today he lost it,
Please note that at every instance, George has totally ignored my suggestions
and advice
Greetings;
As you probably know Russell King is the maintainer of ARM Linux. Him and I
have been debating how serial ports should be handled on an off for months
now. IMHO, today he lost it, declaring that he was going to block all
e-mails from Compaq, which means he can not recieve any more ARM
27 matches
Mail list logo
