* ieee80211 updates
[not found] ` <20050919004450.16m2d1hn7les0o00@www.sourmilk.net>
@ 2005-09-19 5:41 ` Jeff Garzik
2005-09-19 22:00 ` Matt Domsch
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Garzik @ 2005-09-19 5:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Wu
Cc: Christoph Hellwig, James Ketrenos, NetDev, ieee80211-devel,
Andrew Morton, Linux Kernel
Michael Wu wrote:
> If it has a version, then only the maintainer can submit patches -
False. Presence of an optional label in source code files does not
change the fundamental rules of open source, or the processes
surrounding patch merging in the Linux kernel. Anybody who feels the
version number should be changed is welcome to submit a patch. And a
reviewer along the line is welcome to reject such a patch, if they think
it is unwarranted.
> otherwise the
> version is useless for identifying what code you're running. (unless other
False. We have plenty of examples of slower-moving drivers where
community consensus often dictates a version number change.
> submitters decide to alter the version too, which is probably not a good
> idea)
For any given driver/subsystem/whatever version number in the kernel,
ultimately a submittor changes the version and one or more reviewers
approve this, by pulling the change into their tree. Your "probably not
a good idea" is the 100% case here, including the master version number
in ./Makefile.
>>> That early and often thing is true for drivers aswell, the intel
>>> wireless
>>> driver are so hopelessly out of date in mainline just after
>>> submission that
>>> it's not funny anymore. Hopefully we'll have a mainline maintainer for
>>> them soon that imports everything important from intel and other
>>> contributors.
>>
>>
>> Patience: We still have over 20 patches to merge, before even getting
>> to the ipw updates.
>>
> I wish those patches were submitted and merged quickly when they were
> created
> instead of piling up. Other people can't get patches merged because it
Agreed.
> Other people can't get patches merged because it
> would
> break the chain of patches. Patches are being sent too late and
> and infrequently..
Patience. We've got to balance kernel hackers' insatiable desire for
cleanups, with the desire of users and driver developers to move forward
with Linux wireless support.
Since Intel has useful stuff, stuff which affects a wide range of
hardware owned by Linux users, it's worth waiting a bit to let them
catch up. Of course, if it takes forever to merge their stuff, someone
else will inevitably come along and speed up the process. Open source
at work.
Currently, it has rather been like a clock algorithm: merge initial
ieee80211 code from Intel. Accept months worth of cleanups from
community. Accept unifying updates from Jouni. Begin merging work from
Jiri and SuSE. Now the clock hand points at Intel again, and they've
been waiting a while to send useful stuff.
People are slowly converging at a decent solution, while at the same
moving wireless hardware support forward. The need to improve the
wireless API is balanced with the need to keep wireless hardware working
(and/or enable new wireless hardware).
This convergence will be attained more rapidly once the community starts
WORKING TOGETHER, rather than sending me competing patches. Person A
breaks Person B's work. And then back again.
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread