From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] the overdue eepro100 removal Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 13:53:37 -0400 Message-ID: <46927621.6050100@pobox.com> References: <20070701202139.GM10869@stusta.de> <46894BD5.9080609@tmr.com> <46897212.30104@intel.com> <468D15F4.6020106@tmr.com> <20070709125208.GZ3492@stusta.de> <4692701B.3030506@tmr.com> <46927259.4060403@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Bill Davidsen , Adrian Bunk , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, saw@saw.sw.com.sg, Linus Torvalds To: "Kok, Auke" Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:50007 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755545AbXGIRxr (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2007 13:53:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <46927259.4060403@intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Kok, Auke wrote: > as discussed before we really want to avoid having (1) an unmaintained > bitrotting driver for X and (2) one that should work because people are > being paid to take care of it. > > The community has always encouraged us to work with us fixing the last > issues in e100 to make it work for everyone. After all, we have all the > documentation and facilities here to do almost all of the work. Agreed on all points. Jeff