On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Fernando
Lopez-Lezcano<nando@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> IMO I would probably not have lasted as long as he did in this thread.
> Too many type and fire responses - as you mention below - with little
> thought or research (I'm guilty as well, of course).
For what it's worth, as someone who is not incredibly well-versed in
kernel issues but is very interested in the topic at hand (configuring
RT process priority), I was learning a hell of a lot from the
discussion until he threw up his hands and said, to paraphrase, 'gah,
you guys just don't understand me', and walked away.
I really wish he hadn't. Even if some of what was said was verging on
harsh, it was all valid criticism and I would have loved to have seen
more of the concrete points go answered. From a user's point of view,
or even a programmer's point of view, learning to use Linux's RT
provisions properly is really not that obvious, for all the reasons
mentioned in this thread. We were just getting to the point where
people started summarizing and explaining things, when he disappeared
from the conversation.
(By the way, from where I am looking, this disappearance only
emphasizes his attempt to drop a "solution" on the community and walk
away---not very encouraging.)
Honestly though considering that he seems to be a very well-experience
free software programmer working for Red Hat, it's quite surprising to
me how little he seemed to expect criticism and comments from the
community that would be most interested in what he was announcing, and
whom he knew had done lots of work on the exact topic previously. Did
none of the issues brought up in this LAD thread ever appear in his
discussions on LKML?
Steve
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Wed Jun 24 16:15:03 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 24 2009 - 16:15:03 EEST