Re: Termination of the Philips Webcam Driver (pwc)

[Norbert van Nobelen <Norbert@edusupport.nl>]

On the constructive site of this:
Does anybody have a clue yet of how hard it will be to reverse engineer the 
protocol from Philips and get this back into the tree again?

On Friday 27 August 2004 20:13, you wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> > What if someone steps up and want to maintain and extend this piece of
> > code ? Will you forbid him (as in "not in my tree") ?
>
> I'd suggest you contact the people who have worked on that driver (there's
> certainly people outside of nemosoft, at least according to the
> changelogs) and see what they feel like and try to gauge how much they
> were part of driver development.
>
> I'd _really_ prefer not to step on original authors toes.
>
> Quite frankly, the best option is for people who love the driver to plead
> with the author(s). It's totally pointless to flame him/them, that will
> just irritate them and make them less likely to be inclined to say "sure,
> go ahead and maintain the old driver".
>
> But Greg is right - we don't keep hooks that are there purely for binary
> drivers. If somebody wants a binary driver, it had better be a whole
> independent thing - and it won't be distributed with the kernel.
>
> 			Linus
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/