Re: First draft list of 2.3.x "Things to fix"

[David L. Parsley]

On Tue, 4 Jan 2000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 07:36:24PM -0500, David L. Parsley (lkml account) wrote:
> > How about LVM?  I think Linus was waiting to see how much demand there
> > was; there are 1257+ people on the petition at
> 
> Someone decided to petition Linus.  I never saw a post from Linus asking
> whether anyone wanted it or not.  Hopefully this lame effort will have
> no impact on whether or not LVM goes in.  This sort of thing is more
> likely to prejudice people against it, to be honest.

I think you took my message the wrong way; my impression from the LVM site
was "LVM meets the technical criteria, but Linus wants an idea of who is
interested in support for this" - maybe Linus replied to a message and
didn't CC lkml.  Maybe not.  Still, LVM made it into a couple of -ac
patches, so I figure it's technically sound. 

I agree that the idea of petitioning for a patch that Linus has rejected
based on his design judgement is, well, lame.  'Petition' was maybe the
wrong word, but not my choosing. 

cheers,
	David

- --
David L. Parsley
Network Specialist
City of Salem Schools