On 5/6/25 10:27 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 10:17:48AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >> On 5/6/25 10:09 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 09:42:29AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >>>> are very welcome. (But you do have to sign the Oracle Contributor's >>>> Agreement, unfortunately, to get the patches into ktls-utils). >>> >>> I guess we should just for it, which would also take care of the >>> musl support? >> >> My employer might not take kindly to that. >> >> The "MUSL issue" isn't due to the OCA, directly. The developer got >> agreement from his employer (WD) to sign, he just hasn't gotten around >> to it. > > the point is that any kind of CLA is completely unacceptable for > something needed in the core Linux stack. Agreed. > Someone at your employer might have smoked some really bad stuff if > they thought it as a good idea Note that the OCA is a blanket policy. I'm not sure they thought very carefully (or at all) about whether it is appropriate for this specific project. Note also, we got this published two years ago as an experiment. It certainly was not a "core part of the Linux stack" at that time. and I don't think anyone gives a rats > ass if they take it kindly or not. I do. I can't burn that bridge and stay employed. So calm yourself, sir. Let me ask around. -- Chuck Lever
