Re: v9fs release

On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Ronald G. Minnich wrote:

> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Alexander Viro wrote:
> 
> > Frankly, after the look through the source...  Folks, it's unmergable.
> > There are 4 or 5 unrelated patches trying to get out of that beast and
> > as it is the combination will be vetoed.
> 
> well, Al, send me your comments. Although as Greg pointed out a merge into

Will do.

> the base is not at the top of our list right now, as we still have much
> work to do.

Hrm.  Less monolitic patchset == less PITA porting it to newer kernel, but
it's your arse, after all...
 
> If, however, you think we can beat it into mergeable shape with some help
> from you, then I'm willing to look at it. If the goal here is just to let
> you feel better by making gratuitous nasty jabs at people who are just
> trying to contribute something to the community, then I'm less interested.  
> It's your call.

OK, let me put it that way: there are several mostly independent things mixed
in there.  Some of them are definitely worth getting them into mergable shape.
Some look like special cases of more generic stuff that would be interesting.
Interesting for merge, that is.

I can help with splitting and cleaning the things up and I'm definitely
interested in seeing some of that stuff (or equivalents) in the tree.
As for the nasty jabs and feeling good...  I've been dealing with ugly
code almost all the time lately (believe me, you don't want to know) and
nothing associated with that makes me feel good.

BTW, if something of that stuff is going into the tree, it will have to
be posted for review anyway (fsdevel/l-k).  For now keeping it to private
mail probably makes sense, though...