From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.54 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1EvPcv-0004WB-KD for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 07 Jan 2006 20:45:49 -0500 Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 17:45:23 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: David Woodhouse Message-Id: <20060107174523.460f1849.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <1136680734.30348.34.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <20060107220702.GZ3774@stusta.de> <1136678409.30348.26.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20060108002457.GE3774@stusta.de> <1136680734.30348.34.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bunk@stusta.de Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] no longer mark MTD_OBSOLETE_CHIPS as BROKEN and remove broken MTD_OBSOLETE_CHIPS drivers List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , David Woodhouse wrote: > > > > 2. What was the reason for marking them obsolete? > > > > The changelog says: > > - David Woodhouse: large MTD and JFFS[2] update > > I didn't ask who; I knew that. I asked you _why_. Admittedly, I happen > to know that too - but I want to know if _you_ know it. > > Since you've taken it upon yourself to decide the timescale of the > removal, surely it's reasonable to expect that you do actually know what > you're removing and why it's obsolescent? > Hey, Adrian isn't an MTD developer - give him a break. What he's doing here is to poke other maintainers into getting the tree cleaned up. It's a useful thing to do. If you, an MTD maintainer, can tell him what we _should_ be doing, I'm sure Adrian would help.