linux-kernel - Re: kdbus refactoring?

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]

Message-ID: <CANq1E4RLYV1jmW+hO0rBAaUD=fTgnqrmcqt3uYkLpjNS1bMHqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 9 Nov 2015 09:56:04 +0100
From:	David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...ndz.org>,
	Havoc Pennington <havoc.pennington@...il.com>
Subject: Re: kdbus refactoring?

Hi

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 09:34:37AM +0100, David Herrmann wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:53 AM, Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> wrote:
>> > Quoting Documentation/development-process/1.Intro:
>> [...]
>> >> Years of experience with the kernel development community have taught a
>> >> clear lesson: kernel code which is designed and developed behind closed
>> >> doors invariably has problems which are only revealed when the code is
>> >> released into the community.  Sometimes these problems are severe,
>> >> requiring months or years of effort before the code can be brought up to
>> >> the kernel community's standards.
>> [...]
>> > And I've seen you specifically recommend having such conversations early
>> > and often.
>>
>> I think comparing kdbus to "behind closed doors" development models is
>> unfair. We chose to center our development around DBus, not the
>> kernel.
>
> And yet it will be the kernel people you ask to take your code. You
> don't see something funny with that?

No.

>> Anybody who is interested in kdbus discussions could have
>> easily joined the DBus and systemd communication channels (and *many*
>> people did). I see little reason in cross-posting everything to LKML,
>> especially given that our communication is rarely mail-based.
>
> So you want to develop kernel code, but can't be arsed to do it the
> kernel way? Gheez, no wonder this all is going so well..

The submission and following year of development followed the 'kernel
way'. I don't see why the design phase needs to follow your style,
though.

Thanks
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/