| 1 |
On Oct 21, 2013 7:01 PM, "Tanstaafl" <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 2013-10-21 6:48 AM, Mark David Dumlao <madumlao@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> Again. This power is overstated and overtrusted. As for "rip it out at |
| 6 |
>> its roots" he has no ability to do that, only refuse to merge it in |
| 7 |
>> his tree. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Which I believe is a much bigger deal than you seem to think. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
>> But that's only if he bothers to read it. With all the other |
| 14 |
>> stuff he's working on, he signs off less commits than all the other |
| 15 |
>> maintainers do. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> <sigh> irrelevant, because I was talking about something that was |
| 19 |
discovered *after* it was merged... obviously, if something is merged that |
| 20 |
creates a problem (or loud complaints, or whatever), at *that* point he |
| 21 |
will certainly take the time to 'read it' and decide if there is anything |
| 22 |
to it... |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Read the management style doc. Seriously, it describes the kernel's outlook |
| 26 |
on mistakes. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Ostracization and talk of severing limbs like cancer tumors, as is often |
| 29 |
brought up by tinfoilers here, is not how it works. Code talks. Bad, hard |
| 30 |
to maintain code is its own insult. |
Archives