netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] Re: WAN: new PPP code for generic HDLC

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: <20080325.161427.71442171.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	khc@...waw.pl
Cc:	jeff@...zik.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Re: WAN: new PPP code for generic HDLC

From: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:39:49 +0100

> > New synchronous PPP implementation for generic HDLC.
> 
> So are we leaving the generic-HDLC+PPP in broken state for 2.6.25,
> aren't we?

Kyzysztof, this is the way you behave every time your
patches don't get looked at as quickly as you would
like them to.

And this behavior does not trigger us maintainers to
stop everything we're doing and apply your patches.

In fact it makes us want to review your patches even
less.

Sending a healthy ping asking if your patches need
to be resent, etc., is one thing.  But this isn't
what you're doing here.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html