From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A493B82D for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 23:57:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com (aserp1040.oracle.com [141.146.126.69]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A0F11F887 for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 23:57:00 +0000 (UTC) To: Dan Williams From: "Martin K. Petersen" References: <1400925225.6956.25.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> <20140525222923.GW15585@mwanda> <1401119598.3303.6.camel@dabdike> <1401224020.14454.92.camel@dabdike> Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 19:56:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Dan Williams's message of "Wed, 28 May 2014 22:17:53 -0700") Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: James Bottomley , Dan Carpenter , ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TOPIC] Encouraging more reviewers List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >>>>> "Dan" == Dan Williams writes: Dan> Yes, ill conceived "value add" is indeed toxic. Is that the only Dan> contributor factor to indefinite patch acceptance latency? We're Dan> missing a mechanism to allow for experimentation without 1/ risking Dan> the quality of the rest of the kernel 2/ committing to carrying the Dan> experiment upstream indefinitely. Another problem in the value-add department is what hw vendor FOO is unlikely to collaborate with main competitor BAR on a common interface. Friendly collaboration works for us Linux folks but is rare (although it does happen) in the driver space. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering