netdev - Re: net-next-2.6 [pull-request] [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Revised set of feature-negotiation patches

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: <20080911054104.GA3707@gerrit.erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date:	Thu, 11 Sep 2008 07:41:04 +0200
From:	Gerrit Renker <gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	acme@...hat.com, dccp@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: net-next-2.6 [pull-request] [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Revised set of
	feature-negotiation patches

| > Not only are you lacking the courage to admit that it was your own fault
| > to pull a tree no one had asked you to pull, now you are trying to make 
| > me look foolish to cover your own mistake. 
| 
| Your subject line said, and it's still being used in this thread:
| "net-next-2.6 [pull-request]"
| 
| What the heck should I take that to mean exactly?
| 
Yes, it takes two to make a misunderstanding. And maybe it was me who
misunderstood you, or maybe vice versa. Here is my understanding - this
thread started as a pull request, after sending a call for last comments
about two weeks ago. Your first reply in this thread was to extend the
last call for comments, which went on all over last week.

Meanwhile I had contacted you and Arnaldo privately to ask what to do
with DCCP in general. I had emailed you twice, there was no reply,
instead the tree was pulled without further discussion. 

That would probably have been ok if only it had been the right tree.

Since you chose not to reply, I assumed that you were taking responsibility
for your own choices.

By saying that you trusted me in light of what happened, you seem to 
imply that all I had intended was to pull a bad trick on you.

I am not sure I want to believe this. It is not fair to ignore a private
request asking what to do with DCCP and then broadcasting around in
public "I want someone else to get the DCCP changes through".

That will only solve a part of the problem, unfortunately it is not an
insurance against mistakes.

Since you chose not to reply in private regarding what to to with DCCP,
I suggest that we continue/finish this discussion here - yes, probably
after renaming this thread :)

Gerrit
--
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