On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano<na...@ccrma.stanford.edu> 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@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev