Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
Realtime Linux: academia v. realityRealtime Linux: academia v. realityPosted Jul 29, 2010 12:17 UTC (Thu) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784)In reply to: Realtime Linux: academia v. reality by deater Parent article: Realtime Linux: academia v. reality
Writing a publication-quality academic paper is a rather more specialized skill than writing an e-mail fit to be sent to LKML. As such, it is the academics who can more reasonably be asked to make the extra effort here.
(Log in to post comments)
Realtime Linux: academia v. reality Posted Jul 29, 2010 13:17 UTC (Thu) by deater (subscriber, #11746) [Link]
Having done both, I think the kernel community and academia are surprisingly similar.
In both cases if you are only proposing an incremental idea/patch, it's fairly easy to get that looked at and considered.
However if you are planning something drastic, expect months to years of "peer review" (be it by entrenched professors or else just no-nonsense kernel devs).
The process can be long and arbitrary, and it turns off enough people that they don't bother trying. And yes, you have to fight politics, on both ends, and outsiders are treated with suspicion at first.
Realtime Linux: academia v. reality Posted Jul 30, 2010 15:44 UTC (Fri) by sorpigal (subscriber, #36106) [Link]
The difference is that for the lkml you can fire-and-forget, if you so choose, and not worry about whether it gets accepted.
|
|||||||||||||