From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jason@lakedaemon.net (Jason Cooper) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:25:08 -0400 Subject: [PULL REQ] IXP4xx changes for Linux 3.7 In-Reply-To: References: <201210142002.55841.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <20121019162508.GJ14395@titan.lakedaemon.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:01:17AM +0200, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: ... > Unfortunately, as I already explained to you in > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/29/37, my resources for IXP4xx are very > limited (and this isn't a paid job) and I'm in no way able to do what > you require. This, coupled with my inability to make the patches end > up upstream any other way, will make me post relevant MAINTAINERS > changes shortly. > > Don't get me wrong. If I had time for this it could be different. > Unfortunately IXP4xx is a legacy arch, and for me it's simply a hobby > at this point. Given the raised barriers to participate, probably > aimed at paid maintainers, I have to quit doing this. Krzysztof, please reconsider. I'm also a hobbyist maintainer (kirkwood,orion5x,mv78xx0,dove,mvebu). I'd hate to see the community lose a valuable maintainer because arch/arm/ has grown so much. If you would like, I could pull your patches through my tree and send them on to arm-soc. I'm already familiar with arm-soc process, and I'll admit I have a soft spot for mach-ixp4xx. It was my first experience with embedded Linux (nslu2, gateworks boards). This way, you could see the process first hand without having to do the labor. We could do this for a few release cycles so you can see how it goes. After that, we can reassess things. If you still don't wish to lend your experience, so be it. But I hope we can change your mind. thx, Jason.