From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932296Ab3GVLEe (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:04:34 -0400
Received: from mail-ee0-f44.google.com ([74.125.83.44]:35952 "EHLO
	mail-ee0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932170Ab3GVLEc (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:04:32 -0400
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:04:27 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>, Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>,
        Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: mistakes in code vs. maintainer flow mistakes (was: [ 00/19]
 3.10.1-stable review)
Message-ID: <20130722110427.GA2352@gmail.com>
References: <20130715180403.GD15531@xanatos>
 <CA+55aFxmV83=_kjsHGbXFwQW9tXdbT6vyEGcuDTC00X0JJvB7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130715184642.GE15531@xanatos>
 <CA+55aFx+W9V845zcVrUWXvL=qtYYSX=Tj25d4im4gKV5pHA35Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130715195316.GF15531@xanatos>
 <20130715204135.GH15531@xanatos>
 <CA+55aFzwfAkWA6JZruXNKX2=xd-oWM=G8FKhWCVn2xkpR_1sUA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130718103907.GC23558@gmail.com>
 <20130718160754.GC5440@xanatos>
 <20130719092256.GC25784@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130719092256.GC25784@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:

> [...]
> 
> ... and now you want to 'shut down' the discussion. With all due 
> respect, you started it, you have put out various heavy accusations here 
> and elsewhere, so you might as well take responsibility for it and let 
> the discussion be brought to a conclusion, wherever that may take us, 
> compared to your initial view?

I'd like to retract this portion of my mail because in hindsight it's 
overly (and undeservedly) harsh and confrontative.

I found your followup description entirely satisfactory, thanks for taking 
the time to write it up and I think it's a good starting point for the 
Kernel Summit discussion.

Thanks,

	Ingo