From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 15 May 2001 18:09:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 15 May 2001 18:09:39 -0400 Received: from snowbird.megapath.net ([216.200.176.7]:39948 "EHLO megapathdsl.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 15 May 2001 18:09:31 -0400 Subject: Re: LANANA: To Pending Device Number Registrants From: Miles Lane To: Dan Hollis Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain X-Mailer: Evolution/0.10 (Preview Release) Date: 15 May 2001 15:14:28 -0700 Message-Id: <989964874.924.1.camel@agate> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 15 May 2001 13:26:58 -0700, Dan Hollis wrote: > This thread is becoming high enough volume and likely to become much more > so, perhaps a separate ml should be set up for it? linux-device-management > perhaps? I agree that this is going to be a very high-volume discussion. OTOH, this discussion is going to have a fundamental impact on nearly everyong doing driver work in the kernel tree. It's hard for me to conceive of kernel hackers who wouldn't want to track this discussion and thereby gain a much better understanding of the implementation and design issues surrounding Linus driver development. Taking the discussion to another list is likely to fail and would also deprive many of having this information in their faces, which is probably where it belongs. Happy trails, Miles