New mailing list specifically for embedded PowerPC development

Hi all,

After some representations, I have created linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
for the discussion of all things to do with the development of Linux on
embedded PowerPC platforms.

General Linux on PowerPC development discussions should, of course, remain
on this list.

I hope noone feels slighted :-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@ozlabs.org

On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 04:46:55PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

Hi all,

After some representations, I have created linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
for the discussion of all things to do with the development of Linux on
embedded PowerPC platforms.

General Linux on PowerPC development discussions should, of course, remain
on this list.

I hope noone feels slighted :-)

Could we please not do this?  IMHO, it's better to keep everyone on one
list.  Less cross posting, more communication and all of that.  Thanks.
:)

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

I have to agree with Tom. After trying desperatly to keep up in the
time of too many lists, I would really like to keep the lists to a
minimum. If one archive can be searched for answers, life becomes much
easier. It becomes useless to split the lists as everyone on embedded
needs to be on dev eventually and everyone on dev usually ends up on
embedded. It also helps head off rat holes where 2 groups on different
lists solve the same prolem differently. I vote for one list, but the
is just me.

Thanks
Brian 


On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:30:35 -0700, Tom Rini [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 04:46:55PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

quoted

Hi all,

After some representations, I have created linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
for the discussion of all things to do with the development of Linux on
embedded PowerPC platforms.

General Linux on PowerPC development discussions should, of course, remain
on this list.

I hope noone feels slighted :-)

Could we please not do this?  IMHO, it's better to keep everyone on one
list.  Less cross posting, more communication and all of that.  Thanks.
:)

--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/



_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 04:30:35PM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:

Could we please not do this?  IMHO, it's better to keep everyone on one
list.  Less cross posting, more communication and all of that.  Thanks.
:)

I agree with Tom and Brian here. 

I'm sure everybody on -embedded are also subscribed to -dev. -dev 
& -embeeded aren't very noisy and line between embedded stuff and just 
"plain" PPC is blurring :).

Just my $0.02

--
Eugene.

I could go either way, but I think I'm leaning towards separate lists.

On Sep 23, 2004, at 7:31 PM, Brian Waite wrote:

I have to agree with Tom. After trying desperatly to keep up in the
time of too many lists, I would really like to keep the lists to a
minimum. If one archive can be searched for answers, life becomes much
easier. It becomes useless to split the lists as everyone on embedded
needs to be on dev eventually

Probably true...

and everyone on dev usually ends up on embedded.

I think this is the difference. Hackers with an iBook don't necessarily know or care about issues in the drivers for this year's new embedded SoC. In fact they probably don't. They probably care about cpufreq, and 3D acceleration, and why their laptop doesn't wake up when it goes to sleep.

It also helps head off rat holes where 2 groups on different
lists solve the same prolem differently. I vote for one list, but the
is just me.

I think ultimately the problem is that the embedded list ends up generating a *lot* of traffic, and that traffic ends up drowning out non-embedded topics.

-Hollis

On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 08:22:13PM -0500, Hollis Blanchard wrote:

I could go either way, but I think I'm leaning towards separate lists.

On Sep 23, 2004, at 7:31 PM, Brian Waite wrote:

quoted

I have to agree with Tom. After trying desperatly to keep up in the
time of too many lists, I would really like to keep the lists to a
minimum. If one archive can be searched for answers, life becomes much
easier. It becomes useless to split the lists as everyone on embedded
needs to be on dev eventually

Probably true...

quoted

and everyone on dev usually ends up on embedded.

I think this is the difference. Hackers with an iBook don't necessarily 
know or care about issues in the drivers for this year's new embedded 
SoC. In fact they probably don't. They probably care about cpufreq, and 
3D acceleration, and why their laptop doesn't wake up when it goes to 
sleep.

quoted

It also helps head off rat holes where 2 groups on different
lists solve the same prolem differently. I vote for one list, but the
is just me.

I think ultimately the problem is that the embedded list ends up 
generating a *lot* of traffic, and that traffic ends up drowning out 
non-embedded topics.

Look at the flip side of things.  There's the everything developer
folks, who really need to be on all of the lists, the 'embedded' folks,
and the apple folks.  We used to have linux-pmac, but that kinda evolved :)
If someone suggested we have "linuxppc-dev" and "linuxppc-pmac" I assume
that other folks would complain they have to be on two lists...

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

On Sep 23, 2004, at 9:22 PM, Hollis Blanchard wrote:

I think ultimately the problem is that the embedded list ends up generating a *lot* of traffic, and that traffic ends up drowning out non-embedded topics.

This was the reason the list was created years ago.  People got tired
of reading my comments and few people were involved in embedded
development at that time :-)  People with no interest in embedded didn't
want to hear about it.

I don't know why anyone would care if they have to subscribe to
multiple lists to get the information they need.  There isn't any need
to cross post and I don't think this is done very much or at all.  There
have been a few times early in the -embedded days that I have taken
topics from the embedded list to the -dev list, but this isn't necessary
any more because the interested parties are on both.

Personally, it doesn't make any difference to me, I subscribe to lots
of lists.  I think everyone that said "no" so far also subscribes to both
lists, I wonder how many people will want multiple lists?

Thanks.


	-- Dan

On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 01:52:00AM -0400, Dan Malek wrote:

On Sep 23, 2004, at 9:22 PM, Hollis Blanchard wrote:

quoted

I think ultimately the problem is that the embedded list ends up 
generating a *lot* of traffic, and that traffic ends up drowning out 
non-embedded topics.

This was the reason the list was created years ago.  People got tired
of reading my comments and few people were involved in embedded
development at that time :-)  People with no interest in embedded didn't
want to hear about it.

I would dare say that a few years ago the embedded side was a bit
smaller than today :)

I don't know why anyone would care if they have to subscribe to
multiple lists to get the information they need.  There isn't any need
to cross post and I don't think this is done very much or at all.  There
have been a few times early in the -embedded days that I have taken
topics from the embedded list to the -dev list, but this isn't necessary
any more because the interested parties are on both.

Well, it's not exactly obvious to new people why exactly the 'dev' list
isn't for embedded development.  It also helps foster the notion that
'those embedded folks just go off and do their own thing'.

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

I specifically asked for the split.

The reason is that my bandwidth with mailing lists is small enough that
I need a way to quickly spot a patch that will be of interest to the
core kernel (like the recent Machine Check changes, for example) from
the 128654th guy asking why his FCP/OCP/Whatever embedded ethernet doesn't
get a proper MAC address with zeeBoot rev 187.387b4...

There is simply too much noise on the embedded lists, if the lists are
merged, I'll simply not be able to follow the new list and will probably
miss important/interesting stuffs.

To reply to Matt, "then where do pmac-specific discussions belong?", well,
how much pmac specific messages have you seen on linuxppc-dev in the past
few (monthes/years) ?

It's really a matter of signal/noise ratio.

Ben.

On Sat, 2004-09-25 at 12:59, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

I specifically asked for the split.

Oh, and another reason, which, though, is also a signal/noise
ratio matter. I expect most patches addressing ppc32 to be CCed
to linuxppc-dev. This is important for distro people to keep track
of bug fixes that went in after the kernel version they decided to
freeze on.

That will simply not happen if the embedded traffic is mixed in

Ben.

Oh, and another reason, which, though, is also a signal/noise
ratio matter. I expect most patches addressing ppc32 to be CCed
to linuxppc-dev. This is important for distro people to keep track
of bug fixes that went in after the kernel version they decided to
freeze on.

That will simply not happen if the embedded traffic is mixed in

Agreed. I've already missed a patch or two in this big mess.

There is just way too much noise about various embedded issues. Myself
and many others simply don't want to know about latest and greatest
serial/ethernet/foo driver for the latest SoC out of Freescale and it
makes it really really difficult to follow the occasional thread about
stuff we do care about.

Embedded people, think about your complaints if the ppc64 list were
merged too... there would be a whole bunch of email you don't care about
on a list that should be fairly focused.

Cheers,
Owen

On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 01:01:56PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

On Sat, 2004-09-25 at 12:59, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

quoted

I specifically asked for the split.

Oh, and another reason, which, though, is also a signal/noise
ratio matter. I expect most patches addressing ppc32 to be CCed
to linuxppc-dev. This is important for distro people to keep track
of bug fixes that went in after the kernel version they decided to
freeze on.

Are you referring to the pmac distro people, the embedded distro people
or the 'other' distro people here?

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 08:08:16PM -0700, Owen Stampflee wrote:
 

Embedded people, think about your complaints if the ppc64 list were
merged too... there would be a whole bunch of email you don't care about
on a list that should be fairly focused.

I know the arguement is lost, but actually I wasn't infavor of the ppc64
folks being split off too.   And for future reference, I won't be in
favor of linuxppc64-embedded, but I know that's going to happen not too
far down the line either.

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

On Sun, 2004-09-26 at 03:57, Tom Rini wrote:

On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 01:01:56PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

quoted

On Sat, 2004-09-25 at 12:59, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

quoted

I specifically asked for the split.

Oh, and another reason, which, though, is also a signal/noise
ratio matter. I expect most patches addressing ppc32 to be CCed
to linuxppc-dev. This is important for distro people to keep track
of bug fixes that went in after the kernel version they decided to
freeze on.

Are you referring to the pmac distro people, the embedded distro people
or the 'other' distro people here?

The non-embedded ones

Ben.