Did I miss the mud-slinging and corporate culture bashing from the original rejection? I can get the AMD dev being a bit sour by the whole situation if they personally spent time working on this rejected patch, but damn.
> The reason the toplevel maintainer (me) doesn't work for Intel or AMD or any vendors, is that I can say NO when your maintainers can't or won't say it.
And telling them to sit in a corner and really THINK about what you've done, young man:
> I'd like some serious introspection on your team's part on how you got into this situation and how even if I was feeling like merging this (which I'm not) how you'd actually deal with being part of the Linux kernel and not hiding in nicely framed orgchart silo behind a HAL. I honestly don't think the code is Linux worthy code
All pretty mild, really, but I'm not the one who got the email telling me my months of work was not Linux-quality and would not be merged.
(I am giggling at the idea of "Linux quality" being held up as an ideal)
Certainly pretty mild considering the source, though I understand why the second quote would stir things up a bit, especially making it into an "Us vs Them" situation.
See, the thing is that they were told previously -- back in February? March? -- that this wasn't gonna happen. Instead of trying to work out a better way forward, AMD effectively ignored that, went back to work, and just now came back and said "here's 90k LOC, please merge".
Dave replied -- rightfully, in my opinion -- "no".