From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Emanoil Kotsev Subject: Re: USB driver issue Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 02:53:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <420751.76388.qm@web53204.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <20080802091723.GC8213@frodo> Reply-To: deloptes@yahoo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from web53204.mail.re2.yahoo.com ([206.190.49.74]:48362 "HELO web53204.mail.re2.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752309AbYHBJxJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Aug 2008 05:53:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080802091723.GC8213@frodo> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: me@felipebalbi.com Cc: "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com" , "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" I'll stop this discussion. If you feel you are right, then this should be true and I don't mind it. The problem was with you calling 2.6.22 a "such old", but I give up this discussion too. You have the right to think it is and I have the right to do not. After I have your point of view I have to live with that, hope the same for you. It would be anyway nice if you do not make such (2.6.22 - "such old") statments, but if you wish you could and I don't mind either. I think I'll spend my time filing bugs instead of arguing with you, as it leads to nothing obviously. Unfortunately I still don't have a solution - until bugs from 3rd party vednors are solved you label the kernel as old ... but may be in future it will change. regars --- On Sat, 8/2/08, Felipe Balbi wrote: > From: Felipe Balbi > Subject: Re: USB driver issue > To: "Emanoil Kotsev" > Cc: me@felipebalbi.com, "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com" , "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" > Date: Saturday, August 2, 2008, 11:17 AM > On Sat, Aug 02, 2008 at 02:02:27AM -0700, Emanoil Kotsev > wrote: > > Felipe, thank you for answering. I now see what's > the problem with you > > you should really rephrase this. > > > I don't see anywhere the word > "production" in your list, and that's my > point. I want something that works and if there is a bug to > be able to fix it and make it more stable. > > And that will come from the commercial company you said > below. > Hopefully that commercial company will also notify the > community so that > bug won't happen again in recent kernel versions. > > That's exactly what we do when we release a new version > of our Maemo SW, > it's not only a theme change, we're fixing bugs all > around the thing. > > > You debug, test and develop but you DON'T ralay on > it. I am willing to have the oposite. NOT developeing, > testing and debuging, but just using it - can you understand > that? > > And this is something you still don't get. I DO relay > on it. Of course > we freeze internal development as soon as we release the > pieces to > linux-omap, because it doesn't make any sense for us to > keep backporting > so many pieces, although I remember backporting some > patches to 2.6.18 > back in n800 time. > > > I want to use a kernel for PRODUCTION purposes, not > for playing with it as you obviously do. I don't have > time to start over debugging different issues that I did not > have with the previous release, especially when it comes to > my personal data that's stored out there. > > you're wrong here. By the time we release our kernel, > we also publish > everything to linux-omap tree. You can get any version of > linux-omap and > boot your n8xx up to maemo desktop. That's even not a > big deal. > Unfortunately we have a few closed source pieces which we > are still > trying to open, believe me, it's not as easy as > publishing. > > > Even commercial companies support flavour of their > OS's for years, so why shouldn't the linux community > don't do it. It would bring benefit to all of us. Please > refer to the discussion with Greg. I thinkg it makes more > sense > > But then you can get the support from those commercial > companies, > can't you ? > > If there is someone else already supporting older versions > of the kernel > why should we stop ? The thing is, I just want to be sure > the bug > someone is reporting still happens in current code, > otherwise I won't > bother looking. If it's fixed, I just don't have > enough time to > backport, anyone else can do it for you, or even you if you > have the > time/expertise to do so. > > -- > balbi