From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932156AbWGXNud (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:50:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932169AbWGXNud (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:50:33 -0400 Received: from inti.inf.utfsm.cl ([200.1.21.155]:11181 "EHLO inti.inf.utfsm.cl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932156AbWGXNuc (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:50:32 -0400 Message-Id: <200607241349.k6ODnaev003431@laptop13.inf.utfsm.cl> To: Jeff Garzik , Hans Reiser , Theodore Tso , LKML Subject: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion In-Reply-To: Message from Matthias Andree of "Mon, 24 Jul 2006 10:41:33 +0200." <20060724084133.GC24299@merlin.emma.line.org> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.4.2; nmh 1.1; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 19) Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:49:36 -0400 From: "Horst H. von Brand" X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (inti.inf.utfsm.cl [200.1.21.155]); Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:49:39 -0400 (CLT) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Matthias Andree wrote: > On Sat, 22 Jul 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > Anyone who fails to respect the kernel development process, the process > > of building consensus, is turn not respected, flamed, and/or ignored. > > That reminds me of the old "layer 8 and 9" extensions to the OSI/ISO > layering model. Layer 8: financial, Layer 9: policital. Got that one wrong. Layer 8: User Layer 9: Political Layer 10: Financial -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513