From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx.gate01.com (mta23.gyao.ne.jp [125.63.38.249]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0533BDE000 for ; Sat, 11 Oct 2008 04:28:43 +1100 (EST) Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 02:28:37 +0900 From: Paul Mundt To: Bill Gatliff Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] Proposal for a Generic PWM Device API Message-ID: <20081010172837.GB10579@linux-sh.org> References: <1223608819.8157.127.camel@pasglop> <48EED4D1.2040506@billgatliff.com> <20081010093642.GA10579@linux-sh.org> <48EF60B6.20409@billgatliff.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <48EF60B6.20409@billgatliff.com> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Linux/PPC Development , linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 09:03:34AM -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote: > Paul Mundt wrote: > > This is likely because some of those lists are subscribers only, so cross > > posting is poor form. It makes sense to keep the discussion in one place, > > and to send notification messages with a pointer to the list archives to > > the other lists so folks can jump in if they really care. Splitting it > > out doesn't help matters in the least, but unfortunately this is what > > seems to happen the most when subscribers only lists are involved. > > Alright, then maybe I can do this when I post the "final" changeset for review: > cross-post to lkml and linux-embedded, and then post one short note on l-a-k, > linuxppc-dev and elsewhere that refers those interested to the actual content. > I can live with that. > linux-arm-kernel is the only one that is subscribers only out of that list, according to MAINTAINERS. If rmk wants to mandate a broken policy, that's perfectly fine, just don't expect the rest of the kernel community to tolerate it.