From: Andrew Apted <ajapted@netspace.net.au>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 01:18:55 +1000

Re: Makefile vote II

Emmanuel writes:

>  > a) Linus has a bias _against_ GGI.  Now that doesn't mean he would
>  > automatically reject anything from us, but it's reason enough for him to
>  > say "linux is in code freeze, so go away".
>  
>  That's not true. Linus doesn't have a bias against GGI, or its
>  developers. It's just me, but I think he's above that, or Linux wouldn't
>  be where it is now.. 

I've seen him say some pretty harsh things about GGI on the linux-kernel
ML.  Maybe he isn't biased towards GGI per se, I don't know, but it sure
seemed that way back when the `GGI unhappy on linux' thread was raging.

>  He proved it by allowing a patch bearing my name and my ggi-project
>  email address to go into the devel kernel too, even smallish as it
>  was.. :)

Yeah I noticed that :-)

>  Noone is against us for technical reasons, but by misunderstanding and
>  too much unwanted advocacy on the kernel ML. I believe that's not a problem
>  anymore since the two of us started the fbcon/ggi unification thing and
>  Jon came up with kgicon.

I hope so, really.

>  From what I know, Alan is strongly supporting the integration of our
>  new drivers in the kernel. If it doesn't happen for 2.2, it's because we
>  have something to work on some more.

It's just MHO, but I think there sheer size of the patch, as well as the
bad name of GGI on linux-kernel, and also the recent history of what
happened when abscon was put into the kernel, all conspire to make it
very likely to be rejected, so close to 2.2.

Cheers,
_____________________________________________  ____
                                               \  /
  Andrew Apted   <andrew@ggi-project.org>       \/