Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 07:31:55PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Frans Pop <email@example.com> writes:
> > On Friday 29 February 2008, Robert Millan wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:18:58PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> >> > * Robert Millan <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2008-02-25 23:44]:
> >> > > This patch adds -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
> >> >
> >> > This patch seems to miss an update to the package-list file. You can
> >> > use the package-list file to specify that this kernel provides ext2
> >> > and other modules (i.e. that they are built-in).
> >> Thanks. Fixed and committed.
> > Where exactly did anybody give an OK for this to be committed by you?
> > I would say that the comments were at most an invitation to prepare a new
> > patch and submit that for review again.
> > Another example is the commit you did to the manual. You asked for review,
> > but then used a minor comment from someone who's himself not actually part
> > of the team as a justification to commit the change. It would have been
> > much nicer if you'd left a bit more time for the actual maintainers of the
> > manual to respond (especially when you know people are away at a
> > conference). After you already committed I myself no longer saw any point
> > in commenting, so I didn't. I will now probably just rewrite the text if I
> > see a reason to do so.
> > I really totally disagree with the way you appropriate things and am even at
> > this point starting to consider whether your commit access to the D-I SVN
> > repository should just be revoked.
> While I fully agree with your complains and also think that Robert
> should really be more careful in the future I also think that we all
> do mistakes and learn from them.
> He has been very active and tries to make things go fast (as I also do
> mistakenly sometimes) however this doesn't justify his commit right
> Mistakes are far from usual misbehaviour and I'm sure Robert will do
> his best to avoid this to happen again. Am I right Robert?
Sorry, I missunderstood. Please, would you tell me which specific rules I
should observe for each part of D-I? I understand I can handle win32-loader/
directory freely, but for the rest I really don't know, and was just using
<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)