[lugs] [torvalds@transmeta.com: New directions for kernel development] (fwd)

[Raju Mathur <raju@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

That was hilarious... had me ROTFL with the flunkies clustering around
wondering if the master had finally flipped his lid!

More!  Gime more!!

-- Raju

>>>>> "Saravanan" == M K Saravanan <mksarav@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

    Saravanan> ----- Forwarded message from Linus Torvalds
    Saravanan> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> -----

    Saravanan> Delivered-To: cyph@xxxxxxxxxxx Reply-To:
    Saravanan> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> From: "Linus Torvalds"
    Saravanan> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To:
    Saravanan> <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: New directions
    Saravanan> for kernel development Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 00:05:32
    Saravanan> -0800 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    Saravanan> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416
    Saravanan> (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE
    Saravanan> V5.00.2919.6700 Importance: Normal Precedence: bulk
    Saravanan> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Saravanan> Hi all,

    Saravanan> 	Recently, I've been thinking a lot about where Linux
    Saravanan> development should head now that 2.4 is out.
    Saravanan> Specifically, I've been thinking about how we ought to
    Saravanan> make some cultural changes as well as technical
    Saravanan> changes.  Now I'm not *entirely* sure what directions
    Saravanan> we should head in as we move towards 3.0, but I'd like
    Saravanan> to point out a few areas that need to be addressed as
    Saravanan> well as propose some possible solutions.  Nothing is
    Saravanan> set in stone yet, but these are definitely issues we
    Saravanan> need to work on.

    Saravanan> [snip]

-- 
Raju Mathur          raju@xxxxxxxxxxxxx           http://kandalaya.org/