netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: netlink tester program

To: <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: netlink tester program
From: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 20:49:32 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: <david-b@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <rddunlap@xxxxxxxx>, <linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <20030602.203834.115933659.davem@redhat.com>
References: <3EDC0047.7030007@pacbell.net> <20030602.190240.74724523.davem@redhat.com> <3EDC173B.80909@pacbell.net> <20030602.203834.115933659.davem@redhat.com>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
>    From: David Brownell <david-b@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>    Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 20:34:19 -0700
>
>    > See, a document is NOT the spec, the code is the spec.
>
>    That's hardly the only development model.
>
> It's the one that works for _me_ and Alexey and myself, and we're the ones
> doing all the work.

Do you want it to remain that way?

> When someone doing the work desires the docs and desires to
> WRITE it, it will appear.
>
> You can expect exactly nothing more in our development model.
> If you require me to write the docs, you misunderstand how the
> system works :)
>
>    You clipped out the text where I pointed out that bugs can
>    be in specs as well as code.  They can be fixed there, too.
>
> Very true.  So when Randy writes the more detailed netlink/rtnetlink docs,
> we'll be happy :-)
>
> There is even an official IETF RFC written by Jamal, Alexey, and
> others documenting netlink btw :-))))))))))))
>
> Did anybody notice this?

Yes.

~Randy




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>