From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Greear Subject: Re: Broadcom 43xx first results Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 08:43:39 -0800 Message-ID: <4395BFBB.8060304@candelatech.com> References: <20051205190038.04b7b7c1@griffin.suse.cz> <4394892D.2090100@gentoo.org> <20051205195543.5a2e2a8d@griffin.suse.cz> <20051205191008.GA28433@infradead.org> <20051205203121.48241a08@griffin.suse.cz> <20051205194146.GA29317@infradead.org> <20051205211107.61941ab9@griffin.suse.cz> <20051206150909.GB1999@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jiri Benc , Christoph Hellwig , Joseph Jezak , mbuesch@freenet.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, NetDev Return-path: To: Pavel Machek In-Reply-To: <20051206150909.GB1999@elf.ucw.cz> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > >>>That's because you still don't get how we do development. The last thing >>>we want is full-scale rewrites. Submit patches to fix things based on >>>whatever you want but do it incremental. >> >>We have got almost finished and working stack. Everything we need to do >>is: >>1. identify issues; >>2. fix the issues; some of them will need broader discussion; >>3. split it into several (potentially a lot of) reviewable patches; >>4. clean up the drivers. >> >>I'm in phase 2 now (no interesting results yet). I don't think it is > > > No, it does not work like that. You don't get nice, reviewable, > mergeable patches by developing code independently for 3 years or so > then attempting merge. > > If devicescape code is better than mainline, merge it _now_. If it is > not, drop it and start from mainline code. Merge now even if it breaks the current tree? I for one would certainly rather he finish his work on it and get it more polished. Reviewing and testing something that actually works would be a lot more fun... -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com