From: Matthew Wilcox <willy-8fiUuRrzOP0dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
To: "Brown, Len" <len.brown-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: acpi support
<acpi-support-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>,
acpi-devel
<acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [ACPI] RE: [ACPI-sppt] merge acpi-support into acpi-devel?
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2003 18:59:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031004175940.GG24824@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BF1FE1855350A0479097B3A0D2A80EE0CC875A-N2PTB0HCzHJF3Yvz3xaN/VDQ4js95KgL@public.gmane.org>
On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 10:48:31AM -0400, Brown, Len wrote:
> The archive shows that overall, acpi-support gets 18% the traffic that acpi-devel gets.
>
> There are newbie questions on LKML, and there is a FAQ to help them.
> I don't see why we shouldn't follow that model.
>
> The down-side of 2 lists is that people who post to acpi-devel will
> probably get better support, so one wonders what is the advantage of
> having 2 lists.
Personally, I'm really not interested in any of the x86 shitty BIOS IRQ
routing type issues. I'm interested in the following ACPI things:
- It has to work on ia64 (that's my day job).
- Solving some of the impedence mismatches between what ACPI expects
and what the core kernel provides (eg the PCI config space accessing,
down_timeout(), etc).
- Refactoring the ACPI code to work better.
Not that I expect the lists to be arranged for my benefit, but would
anybody else be interested in a list-split along the lines of
- acpi-x86 (for x86 specific problems)
- acpi-core (for everything else)
--
"It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or
victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies.
Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-04 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-04 14:48 [ACPI-sppt] merge acpi-support into acpi-devel? Brown, Len
[not found] ` <BF1FE1855350A0479097B3A0D2A80EE0CC875A-N2PTB0HCzHJF3Yvz3xaN/VDQ4js95KgL@public.gmane.org>
2003-10-04 15:59 ` Robert Vollmert
2003-10-04 17:59 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-10-06 21:51 [ACPI] " Brown, Len
2003-10-06 23:33 Cagle, John (ISS-Houston)
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=20031004175940.GG24824@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
--to=willy-8fiuurrzop0dnm+yrofe0a@public.gmane.org \
--cc=acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org \
--cc=acpi-support-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org \
--cc=len.brown-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox