linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Please pull 'upstream' branch of wireless-2.6
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 19:38:11 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070507233811.GB4245@tuxdriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <463FB1A0.3070608@garzik.org>

On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 07:09:20PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> John W. Linville wrote:

> >Ivo van Doorn (1):
> >      Add 93cx6 eeprom library

> >Michael Wu (1):
> >      Add rtl8187 wireless driver

I presume these are the two parts you question.  (Just checking...)

> The normal development process is:
> 
> * commit new code to your repository
> * that goes into -mm for public testing and review
> * merge window opens
> * the code that has seen public testing and review goes upstream
> 
> The general idea is everything you want in 2.6.22 should be prepared and 
> in -mm BEFORE 2.6.21 is released, and the 2.6.22 merge window opens.
> 
> It's quite normal for fixes and minor changes to trickle in after the 
> push that follows the merge window opening.  But new drivers that have 
> not been through this process do not fall under "fixes and minor changes."
 
I agree whole-heartedly.

The whole mac80211 driver package (including rtl8187) has been in -mm
(and rawhide) for most of the 2.6.21 development cycle.  The rtl8187
driver in particular has been relatively stable for the past couple
of months ("3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)" since
7 March 2007), and it seems to work well.

> I also did not see any response to my "better as a single file driver" 
> suggestion.

Yes, I see that now.  Do you consider this a merge requirement?

My main concern pre-merge would be accidentally destabilizing the code
while stitching the files together.  Other than that, the suggestion
seems worthwhile.  However, I think Michael plans to expand the driver
to support rtl8180 and rtl8185.  This may factor into why he chose
to organize the code the way he has.

> So, I'll pull if you remove the two late additions.

Any chance that you find the comments above persuasive? :-)

John
-- 
John W. Linville
linville@tuxdriver.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-05-08  0:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-07 17:51 Please pull 'upstream' branch of wireless-2.6 John W. Linville
2007-05-07 21:15 ` Dan Williams
2007-05-07 22:51   ` John W. Linville
2007-05-08  8:49   ` Johannes Berg
2007-05-07 23:09 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-07 23:30   ` Michael Wu
2007-05-07 23:38   ` John W. Linville [this message]
2007-05-08 17:38 ` John W. Linville
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-05-29 18:30 Please pull 'upstream-fixes' " John W. Linville
2007-05-29 18:31 ` Please pull 'upstream' " John W. Linville
2007-05-30 14:03   ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-08 17:39 John W. Linville
2007-05-09 22:54 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-03-27 18:26 Please pull 'upstream-fixes' " John W. Linville
2007-03-27 18:26 ` Please pull 'upstream' " John W. Linville
2007-03-29 12:31   ` Jeff Garzik
2007-03-16 21:31 Please pull 'upstream-fixes' " John W. Linville
2007-03-16 21:34 ` Please pull 'upstream' " John W. Linville
2007-03-23  5:55   ` Jeff Garzik
2007-03-23 12:02     ` Dan Williams
2007-03-08  3:30 Please pull 'upstream-fixes' " John W. Linville
2007-03-08  3:32 ` Please pull 'upstream' " John W. Linville
2007-03-09 16:59   ` Jeff Garzik
2007-02-27 20:50 Please pull 'upstream-fixes' " John W. Linville
2007-02-27 20:51 ` Please pull 'upstream' " John W. Linville
2007-03-03  0:42   ` Jeff Garzik
2007-02-02 21:27 Please pull "upstream-fixes" " John W. Linville
2007-02-02 21:28 ` Please pull "upstream" " John W. Linville
2007-02-07  0:06 ` Please pull "upstream-fixes" " Jeff Garzik
2007-02-07 21:11   ` Please pull "upstream" " John W. Linville
2007-02-09 20:13     ` John W. Linville
2007-02-09 21:12       ` Jeff Garzik

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=20070507233811.GB4245@tuxdriver.com \
    --to=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=jeff@garzik.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).