From: James Ketrenos <jketreno@linux.intel.com>
To: Jiri Benc <jbenc@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
Michael Wu <flamingice@sourmilk.net>,
John Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Subject: Re: "Stable" branch of mac80211
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 09:52:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46361EE3.6060107@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070429194855.451b9e7c@logostar.upir.cz>
Jiri Benc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've created a new 'stable' branch in my tree
> (git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jbenc/mac80211.git). It
> contains patches that strip mac80211 down to a stable version. The purpose
> of this branch is to prepare mac80211 for vanilla inclusion.
...
> Currently, it contains following patches:
>
> mac80211: remove 802.11n parts
> mac80211: remove WPA testing stuff
> mac80211: remove hostapd ioctls
> mac80211: remove nonstable iwpriv ioctls
> mac80211: remove iwpriv ioctls with wext equivalent
> mac80211: remove AP and WDS support
I'm curious what the criteria was for removing code from 'stable'
Are there known bugs/oops? Is it known to be broken, or ?
For code we know we ultimately want to be redone, removed, or whatever, I can understand not wanting to merge the code. However we ultimately want AP, WDS, and 802.11n. At least with 802.11n, I haven't seen anything indicating the code needs to be done any differently than it is currently being done.
I assume the entire new tree will be marked as 'experimental', so what is the advantage gained by pulling this code out now?
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-30 17:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-29 17:48 "Stable" branch of mac80211 Jiri Benc
2007-04-29 18:14 ` Michael Wu
2007-04-29 19:55 ` Jiri Benc
2007-04-30 16:52 ` James Ketrenos [this message]
2007-04-30 17:29 ` Jiri Benc
2007-04-30 18:45 ` John W. Linville
2007-05-01 1:00 ` Jiri Benc
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=46361EE3.6060107@linux.intel.com \
--to=jketreno@linux.intel.com \
--cc=flamingice@sourmilk.net \
--cc=jbenc@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.