Re: [PATCH] Add vt6656 driver to drivers/staging.

[Forest Bond <forest@alittletooquiet.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2836 bytes --]

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 06:10:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:19:06AM -0400, Forest Bond wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 09:02:48AM -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 02:43:54PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > > Hi Marcel,
> > > > 
> > > > > just to document the irony here. Two or three years ago at OLS, Kyle and
> > > > > Greg were making fun of Ubuntu merging its 5th wireless stack into their
> > > > > kernel. Now the staging crap is doing exactly the same.
> 
> Yes we are.  But we are doing it correctly :)
> 
> Turns out that people actually want to use their hardware, and no one
> else was working on merging these drivers, so that is what staging is
> for.
> 
> > Well, gosh, I understand the criticism here and if I were a kernel developer I
> > imagine my perspective would be much the same.  But I can't help but feel that
> > there's some amount of hypocrisy when we hammer on a manufacturer to properly
> > license their driver and then let it drop dead when they do.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> > I understand that the problem would be solved if they manufacturers would
> > suddenly "get it," but the scale of social problem preventing that is likely too
> > large to change anytime soon.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> > If kernel developers are too busy to support the hardware, why do the
> > manufacturers take so much criticism for releasing binary-only drivers or badly
> > licensed drivers, or for neglecting to release technical specifications?  If
> > what I'm sensing is correct and there's no practical likelihood of these devices
> > getting in-kernel support even with those issues resolved, the criticism almost
> > seems unjustified.
> > 
> > I appreciate what the kernel developers do, of course, and my intention is not
> > to ruffle feathers.  But when a manufacturer that has taken a lot of criticism
> > for its approach to the Linux community shows some good will, it seems like we
> > ought to be able to turn that into something productive.  If we can't, what have
> > we been complaining about?
> > 
> > My apologies if I'm way off on this.  I haven't been around all that long so it
> > is certainly possible.
> 
> You aren't way off at all.
> 
> Thanks for the patches, I'll get to them in a few days when my "real
> job" calms down a bit.  They're now in my queue, and will not get lost.

Thanks, Greg.  Your reputation is well-deserved, to say the least.

I need to get you some new patches, anyway, as the upstream sources depend on
header files that I failed to provide as they sit in a separate includes
directory.  I'll get this sent as soon as time permits (probably today or
tomorrow).

-Forest
-- 
Forest Bond
http://www.alittletooquiet.net
http://www.pytagsfs.org

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]