On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 05:43:24PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > ty den 15.02.2005 Klokka 21:35 (+0100) skreiv Olivier Galibert: > > That's the second time I see you refusing an interoperability patch > > without bothering to say what would be acceptable. Do we need a fork > > between knfsd-pure and knfsd-actually-works-in-the-real-world or what? > > You appear to be under the misguided impression that if a patch is > reviewed, and rejected, then somehow the responsibility for resolving > your problem (and cleaning up the code) falls to the reviewer. > > I'm not aware of any such rule.
Resolving the problem and/or cleaning the code, no. Telling what kind of patch would be acceptable is your responsability, yes. That's where the difference is between a reviewer and a naysayer. OG. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
