By saying that Hector is the problem, he’s implicitly saying that Christoph is not the problem. By saying that the current process works–the very same process that just prevented R4L from submitting patches to the kernel, he’s implicitly endorsing Christoph’s actions.
Perhaps. That is not my read. I hear Linus saying that he trusts the process and that sticking with it is the solution to working through the problem. He does not say that a maintainer blocking a technically sound patch is a problem. He does not say that he would reject the patch. He does say that the approach taken by Hector ( who is not the one that submitted the patch ) is the wrong one. If Linus had said that the technical approach or the code quality was a problem, I would agree with you. He did not object to either of those things. What he said is that social media is not the solution.
The problem with your timeline is that it completely leaves out the event(s) that Linus is objecting to. I am hoping that is unintentional on your part.
I will know what Linus thinks when he either accepts or rejects the submission from the R4L team.
The boiled down summary is:
Abdiel Janulgue submits the patch to Christoph Hellwig
Christoph rejects the patch because he doesn’t want to maintain it
Danilo Krummrich offers to maintain it
Christoph says no and that he “will do everything [he] can do to stop [Rust support from being added to the DMA subsystem]”
Hector Martin adds Linus and says “If Linus doesn’t pipe up with an authoritative answer to this thread, Miguel and the other Rust folks should just merge this series once it is reviewed and ready, ignoring Christoph’s overt attempt at sabotaging the project.”
Linus says “How about you accept the fact that maybe the problem is you. You think you know better. But the current process works.”
By saying that Hector is the problem, he’s implicitly saying that Christoph is not the problem. By saying that the current process works–the very same process that just prevented R4L from submitting patches to the kernel, he’s implicitly endorsing Christoph’s actions.
Perhaps. That is not my read. I hear Linus saying that he trusts the process and that sticking with it is the solution to working through the problem. He does not say that a maintainer blocking a technically sound patch is a problem. He does not say that he would reject the patch. He does say that the approach taken by Hector ( who is not the one that submitted the patch ) is the wrong one. If Linus had said that the technical approach or the code quality was a problem, I would agree with you. He did not object to either of those things. What he said is that social media is not the solution.
The problem with your timeline is that it completely leaves out the event(s) that Linus is objecting to. I am hoping that is unintentional on your part.
I will know what Linus thinks when he either accepts or rejects the submission from the R4L team.
I didn’t include the social media “brigading” portion because Linus already addressed that in a different sub-thread.