Messages in this thread | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: xfs: does mkfs.xfs require fancy switches to get decent performance? (was Tux3 Report: How fast can we fsync?) | Date | Wed, 13 May 2015 13:38:24 -0700 |
| |
On Wednesday, May 13, 2015 1:25:38 PM PDT, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 13. Mai 2015, 12:37:41 schrieb Daniel Phillips: >> On 05/13/2015 12:09 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: ... > > Daniel, if you want to change the process of patch review and > inclusion into > the kernel, model an example of how you would like it to be. This has way > better chances to inspire others to change their behaviors themselves than > accusing them of bad faith. > > Its yours to choose. > > What outcome do you want to create?
The outcome I would like is:
* Everybody has a good think about what has gone wrong in the past, not only with troublesome submitters, but with mutual respect and collegial conduct.
* Tux3 is merged on its merits so we get more developers and testers and move it along faster.
* I left LKML better than I found it.
* Group hugs
Well, group hugs are optional, that one would be situational.
Regards,
Daniel
| |