From: Tim Riker <Tim@Rikers.org>
To: Nicholas Knight <tegeran@home.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Change of policy for future 2.2 driver submissions
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 23:38:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A556BF2.AD3860A6@Rikers.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E14EMpJ-0006ty-00@the-village.bc.nu> <002201c076c7$76cab720$8d19b018@c779218a>
Nicholas,
While I can see what you are asking, here are some comments in Alan's
favor:
He did not say people can not release 2.2 patches without 2.4 patches.
He only said they will not be integrated into the kernel distribution
without 2.4 patches.
If people continue to develop for 2.2 and have someone else, who is
probably less familiar with the hardware, port to 2.4 for them, how soon
would you trust the drivers over the 2.2 drivers?
In short, I agree with Alan completely. This is the correct move forward
to cause 2.4 to become the stable release that everyone will be willing
to adopt.
Nicholas Knight wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alan Cox" <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 6:41 PM
> Subject: Change of policy for future 2.2 driver submissions
>
> >
> > Linux 2.4 is now out, it is also what people should be concentrating on
> first
> > when issuing production drivers and driver updates. Effective from this
> point
> > 2.2 driver submissions or major driver updates will only be accepted if
> the
> > same code is also available for 2.4.
> >
> > Someone has to do the merging otherwise, and it isnt going to be me...
>
> This is the first time I'll have sent anything to this list, and I hadn't
> planned on sending anything for a long time to come, but I think in this
> case I must toss in my 2cents.
> While I understand the reasoning behind this, and might do the same thing if
> I was in your position, I feel it may be a mistake.
> I personaly do not trust the 2.4.x kernel entirely yet, and would prefer to
> wait for 2.4.1 or 2.4.2 before upgrading from 2.2.18 to ensure last-minute
> wrinkles have been completely ironed out, and I know there are people who
> share my viewpoint, and would rather use 2.2.XX for a while yet, and I'm
> afraid that this may partialy criple 2.2 driver development.
> It can take little or a lot of time to port a driver from 2.2 to 2.4, and in
> some cases people may just not want to do it untill 2.4 has gone through a
> little more refining, and that could take a while.
>
> To sum it up, I just don't think this is the right decision to make, at
> least not yet.
> My opinion probably won't matter one bit, but I thought I might as well toss
> it out there.
>
> -NK
--
Tim Riker - http://rikers.org/ - short SIGs! <g>
All I need to know I could have learned in Kindergarten
... if I'd just been paying attention.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-01-05 6:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-01-05 2:41 Change of policy for future 2.2 driver submissions Alan Cox
2001-01-05 3:27 ` Nicholas Knight
2001-01-05 4:23 ` Mark Hahn
2001-01-05 12:52 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-01-05 6:38 ` Tim Riker [this message]
2001-01-05 6:57 ` Andre Tomt
2001-01-05 7:30 ` Gerhard Mack
2001-01-05 11:46 ` Rik van Riel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-01-05 3:50 Michael D. Crawford
2001-01-05 8:29 ` Miles Lane
2001-01-05 17:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-01-09 14:49 ` Hubert Mantel
2001-01-09 14:54 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-09 23:49 ` Jakob Østergaard
2001-01-10 0:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-01-10 0:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2001-01-10 1:03 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-01-10 1:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2001-01-10 1:40 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-01-05 17:11 Wayne.Brown
2001-01-05 17:15 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-05 17:23 ` Christoph.Hellwig.
[not found] ` <hchÀcaldera.de>
2001-01-05 17:31 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-05 17:32 Wayne.Brown
2001-01-05 18:50 ` Matthew D. Pitts
2001-01-05 20:33 Wayne.Brown
2001-01-06 10:15 ` Nick Holloway
2001-01-08 4:52 Wayne.Brown
2001-01-08 11:07 ` David Weinehall
2001-01-08 15:36 Wayne.Brown
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=3A556BF2.AD3860A6@Rikers.org \
--to=tim@rikers.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tegeran@home.com \
/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