[openib-general] comments on DAT registry in OpenIB

[Caitlin Bestler]

Taking an interface because it has a user base, and then
ignoring that user base is just plain idiotic.

If you want to design your own RDMA interface do so.
But changing DAT to meet your whims rather than 
actual code requirements makes no sense. If you
can't come up with something that remains acceptable
to the broader community of DAT users then you should
refrain from using the "dat_" symbols and their already
established meanings.

When there *is* a requirement, the DAT community
is willing to work out a solution that will be acceptable
to Linux *and* developers for other operating systems.


On 6/30/05, Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de> wrote:
> Could you please stop that comitte crap?
> 
> James, what do you think about doing an s/DAT/RDMA/ and s/dat/rdma/
> on the code so we can stop this endless mess?  In the end it won't
> look like dat anyway, and the sooner why make that absolutely clear
> that less idiocy like this is going to happen.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openib-general mailing list
> openib-general at openib.org
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> 
> To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>