From: Nicolas Mailhot <Nicolas.Mailhot@laPoste.net>
To: Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com>
Cc: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
markus.kossmann@inka.de,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>,
Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
Michael Krufky <mkrufky@m1k.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ho ho ho.. Linux 2.6.15-rc7
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:10:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43B2B913.9090002@laPoste.net> (raw)
1. the latest and greatest ivtv is 0.5.x svn trunk
2. a week ago it still depended on some v4l cvs changes not merged
upstream (ie could not build without a private v4l tree dump)
3. and it had firmware loading problems with the latest 2.6.15-rc git
dumps
4. the merging process stalled considerably when the paken fork was
discovered
The root of the problem of course is ivtv developpers still haven't
understood the "release early, release often" part and are aiming for
a perfect (cleaned-up and feature-complete) driver before submitting
it. Instead of merging everything now (experimental) and finishing the
paken merge cleanup / inside the kernel.
ivtv 0.5 is not even available as a kernel patchset, so you get the
idea. ivtv writers would get a boatload of feedback if it behaved like
any other kernel patchset.
Now don't get me wrong, the ivtv people did and are doing a wonderful
job driver-side, but they seriously need to learn to integrate in the
kernel ecosystem. Someone wrote in the thread about the need to "kick"
them a bit to make them understand this. I'm afraid this feeling is
shared by a lot of other people. The low priority given to merging is
real frustrating.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Mailhot
next reply other threads:[~2005-12-28 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-28 16:10 Nicolas Mailhot [this message]
2005-12-28 17:13 ` Ho ho ho.. Linux 2.6.15-rc7 Michael Krufky
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-12-27 11:44 Luuk van der Duim
2005-12-25 3:39 Linus Torvalds
2005-12-25 5:00 ` Keith Owens
2005-12-26 5:23 ` Grant Coady
2005-12-26 13:54 ` Kalin KOZHUHAROV
2005-12-28 9:11 ` Paul Rolland
2005-12-26 18:02 ` Mark Knecht
2005-12-26 18:14 ` Lee Revell
2005-12-27 2:49 ` Mark Knecht
2005-12-27 5:56 ` Michael Krufky
2005-12-27 13:23 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2005-12-27 17:53 ` Michael Krufky
2005-12-26 18:50 ` Markus Koßmann
2005-12-26 23:24 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2005-12-27 5:47 ` Michael Krufky
2005-12-27 12:43 ` Pekka Enberg
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=43B2B913.9090002@laPoste.net \
--to=nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=markknecht@gmail.com \
--cc=markus.kossmann@inka.de \
--cc=mchehab@infradead.org \
--cc=mkrufky@m1k.net \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.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