Re: Linux 2.5.19

On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 01:44:12PM -0700, James Simmons wrote:

quoted

This is completely wrong - the driver has been tested NOT to work on
the Integraphics 1682.  As such, please do uncomment these lines.

Due to a error with merging some stuff from a older DJ tree. I fixed it
in the fbdev BK repository.

They haven't *been* in any DJ tree.

quoted

In addition, I'm disappointed that no one forwarded the patch for
maintainer approval PRIOR to submitting it to Linus.

I'm even more disappointed that some people DONT test my patches especially
when I announce them and usually wait about 5 days before pushing them to 
Linus. Some of the changes I have done have been sitting around for months
in the DJ tree. The good news is that people can now look at skeletonfb.c
to see how to port the fbdev drivers to the new api. Of course I have a
feeling most will not bother so I will have to do it for them.

Why the fuck should I go around finding and testing peoples trees when I
haven't submitted the stuff to them?  *YOU* shouldn't go around randomly
pulling stuff from maintainers trees without first asking them why the
change hasn't been submitted.

I'm not talking about general maintainence of the cyber2000fb driver here,
or general "keep it working" type changes.  I'm talking about a blatent
"take the version from the rmk patch and submit it to Linus without telling
the maintainer of the code you're buggering with" attitude here.

-- 
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html


_______________________________________________________________

Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm