On Tue, 2 May 2000, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Yes, he is an asshole to everyone not at redhat, we have agreement on that.
Liar. I'm an asshole to those who in my opinion deserve it. Doesn't
correlate with employment - _very_ easy to prove. Besides, opinion about
you (OK, technical parts of it - my opinion about your charming PHB
personality is a separate story) had been stated in public _way_ before
any interactions with redhat, so feel free to drop your conspiracy
theories. Since we got into the season of frankness, let me point out that
my deepest disrespect to you has nothing to my opinion of reiserfs code. I
have no problems with people who actually wrote it. The fact that they got
a slimeball as a business manager has nothing with the technical side of
story. I find the fact that you claim credit for others' work and
especially the way you do it disgusting at extreme, but it doesn't make
said work worse.
IMO you are... well, I'm not sure which word would express it
adequately in English. In Russian it would be "mraz'".
> He had absolutely no intention of being helpful to us, you can tell from his
> emails that his objective was to maximize the noise and minimize the assistance
> by being as unspecific as possible. He didn't give a damn about helping us to
> fix bugs, he wrote his emails solely for the objective of keeping us from
> competing with ext3 in 2.4. Actually, if you read what he posts on
I hate to piss on your parade, but... ext3 is not even submitted and from
all SCT ever said it looks like he doesn't plan it for 2.4. Care to do
reality checks from time to time? I don't know what drugs you are taking
to achieve telepathy, but they obviously (a) do not work and (b) have
nasty side effects.
[snip the rest of idiocy]
ObNFS: weird as it may sound to you, I actually write stuff - not
"subcontract" to somebody else. So I'm afraid that I have slightly less
free time than you do. FWIC, in Reiserfs context nfsd is a non-issue.
Current kludge is not too lovely, but it's well-isolated and can be
replaced fast. So ->read_inode2() is ugly, but in my opinion it's not an
obstacle. If other problems will be resolved and by that time
->fh_to_dentry() interface will not be in place - count on my vote for
temporary adding ->read_inode2().
