Re: vm_fault_t conversion, for real
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 06:22:56 -0700
- From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: vm_fault_t conversion, for real
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 03:03:09PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 04:23:47AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 07:43:34AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > this series tries to actually turn vm_fault_t into a type that can be
> > > typechecked and checks the fallout instead of sprinkling random
> > > annotations without context.
> > Yes, why should we have small tasks that newcomers can do when the mighty
> > Christoph Hellwig can swoop in and take over from them? Seriously,
> > can't your talents find a better use than this?
> I've spent less time on this than trying to argue to you and Souptick
> that these changes are only to get ignored and yelled at as an
> "asshole maintainer". So yes, I could have done more productive things
> if you hadn't forced this escalation.
Perhaps you should try being less of an arsehole if you don't want to
get yelled at? I don't mind when you're an arsehole towards me, but I
do mind when you're an arsehole towards newcomers. How are we supposed
to attract and retain new maintainers when you're so rude?