Re: New vger mailing list request - linux-firmware

Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-06-08T20:38:57Z

On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 10:31:53PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 01:25:17PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Linus Torvalds
> > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Do users deserve the amount of silly regressions and issues we've seen
> > >> over the years on firmware_class ? Would yet-another mailing list help
> > >> ? I think so.
> > >
> > > No.
> > >
> > > Boutique mailing lists are generally a _bad_ thing. All it means that
> > > there's an increasingly small "in group" that thinks that they
> > > generate consensus beause nobody disagrees with their small boutique
> > > list, because nobody else even _sees_ that small list.
> > >
> > > We should only have mailing lists if they really merit the volume, and
> > > are big enough that there are lots of users.
> >
> > Even many device drivers tend to have mailing lists. While I see the
> > "in group" thing being a bad thing, I would say a few folks would be a
> > bit disturbed if they were requested to subscribe and read lkml to get
> > their driver updates they need to review. Its not clear to me where
> > the distinction should be made though. I tend to agree perhaps a
> > *vger* mailing list is not in merit for firmware_class, its not
> > obvious to me say an infradead.org list might not be in order.
>
> This is infrastructure that drivers use, not something huge and big that
> warrents a whole separate mailing list. Come on now, it's not that big
> of a chunk of code, no matter how complex the beast might be :)

Alright, I'll keep CC'ing tons of you then !

I'd also appreciate if those contributing will also try CC those in this email
except David Miller of course, our benevolent postmaster.

Luis