linux-kernel - Re: [ck] Re: Linus 2.6.23-rc1

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 28 Jul 2007 21:28:36 +0200
From:	jos poortvliet <jos@...nkamer.nl>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	ck@....kolivas.org, Michael Chang <thenewme91@...il.com>,
	Kasper Sandberg <lkml@...anurb.dk>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ck] Re: Linus 2.6.23-rc1

Op Saturday 28 July 2007, schreef Linus Torvalds:
<snip stuff i generally sagree with>
>
> Compare this to SD for a while. Ponder.
>
> 			Linus

Your point here seems to be: this is how it went, and it was right. Ok, got 
that. Yet, Con walked away (and not just over SD). Seeing Con go, I wonder 
how many did leave without this splash. How many didn't even get involved at 
all??? Did THAT have to happen? I don't blame you for it - the point is that 
somewhere in the process a valuable kernel hacker went away. How and why? And 
is it due to a deeper problem?

-- 
Disclaimer:

Alles wat ik doe denk en zeg is gebaseerd op het wereldbeeld wat ik nu heb. 
Ik ben niet verantwoordelijk voor wijzigingen van de wereld, of het beeld wat 
ik daarvan heb, noch voor de daaruit voortvloeiende gedragingen van mezelf. 
Alles wat ik zeg is aardig bedoeld, tenzij expliciet vermeld.

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

   A: Because it destroys the flow of the conversation
   Q: Why is top-posting bad?

Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)