From: Matt Porter <mporter@kernel.crashing.org> Date: 2005-07-27 17:15:07
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 09:27:41AM -0700, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 12:13:23PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
quoted
Kumar, I thought that we had some volunteers to take care of some of
those. I know that I still care about ep405, and I'm willing to maintain
the code.
Well, it has been almost two months since Kumar asked about maintenance
for this board. Nothing happened since then.
Why is it not fixed yet? Please, send a patch which fixes it. This is
the _best_ way to keep this board in the tree, not some empty
maintenance _promises_.
When we recover our history from the linuxppc-2.4/2.5 trees we can
show exactly how long it's been since anybody touched ep405.
Quick googling shows that it's been almost 2 years since the last
mention of ep405 (exluding removal discussions) on linuxppc-embedded.
Last ep405-related commits are more than 2 years ago.
-Matt
From: Kumar Gala <hidden> Date: 2005-07-27 23:38:32
On Jul 27, 2005, at 12:15 PM, Matt Porter wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 09:27:41AM -0700, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 12:13:23PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
quoted
Kumar, I thought that we had some volunteers to take care of some of
those. I know that I still care about ep405, and I'm willing to
maintain
quoted
quoted
the code.
Well, it has been almost two months since Kumar asked about
maintenance
quoted
for this board. Nothing happened since then.
Why is it not fixed yet? Please, send a patch which fixes it. This is
the _best_ way to keep this board in the tree, not some empty
maintenance _promises_.
When we recover our history from the linuxppc-2.4/2.5 trees we can
show exactly how long it's been since anybody touched ep405.
Quick googling shows that it's been almost 2 years since the last
mention of ep405 (exluding removal discussions) on linuxppc-embedded.
Last ep405-related commits are more than 2 years ago.
So we are ok with it being removed. This seems to be the only board
port that I removed that has caused any noise.
- kumar
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 09:27:41AM -0700, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 12:13:23PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
quoted
Kumar, I thought that we had some volunteers to take care of some of
those. I know that I still care about ep405, and I'm willing to maintain
the code.
Well, it has been almost two months since Kumar asked about maintenance
for this board. Nothing happened since then.
Why is it not fixed yet? Please, send a patch which fixes it. This is
the _best_ way to keep this board in the tree, not some empty
maintenance _promises_.
When we recover our history from the linuxppc-2.4/2.5 trees we can
show exactly how long it's been since anybody touched ep405.
Quick googling shows that it's been almost 2 years since the last
mention of ep405 (exluding removal discussions) on linuxppc-embedded.
Last ep405-related commits are more than 2 years ago.
I don't follow that reasoning. Even broken drivers(board support files,
whateever) are better than non.
Take ArcNet support forinstance. Clearly it hadn't been used in any 2.6
kernel up until around 2.6.10. It was highly broken (call to
uninitialized function pointer). But I needed it. I fixed it and send the
patch so it works from 2.6.11 and up. If the driver had been dropped in
the 2.6 series because nobody actively maintained it, I wouldn't have got
around to fix it at all and was probably forced to use another OS for my
perpose.
But because the driver was still in there and somebody had made sure it
was updated along the changes to the API in the 2.6 kernel, it was easy
for me to fix it although I didn't know so much about the kernel internals
at that time.
Esben
From: Kumar Gala <hidden> Date: 2005-07-29 18:13:13
On Jul 29, 2005, at 12:03 PM, Esben Nielsen wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Matt Porter wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 09:27:41AM -0700, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 12:13:23PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
quoted
Kumar, I thought that we had some volunteers to take care of some
of
quoted
quoted
quoted
those. I know that I still care about ep405, and I'm willing to
maintain
quoted
quoted
quoted
the code.
Well, it has been almost two months since Kumar asked about
maintenance
quoted
quoted
for this board. Nothing happened since then.
Why is it not fixed yet? Please, send a patch which fixes it. This
is
quoted
quoted
the _best_ way to keep this board in the tree, not some empty
maintenance _promises_.
When we recover our history from the linuxppc-2.4/2.5 trees we can
show exactly how long it's been since anybody touched ep405.
Quick googling shows that it's been almost 2 years since the last
mention of ep405 (exluding removal discussions) on linuxppc-embedded.
Last ep405-related commits are more than 2 years ago.
I don't follow that reasoning. Even broken drivers(board support
files,
whateever) are better than non.
Take ArcNet support forinstance. Clearly it hadn't been used in any
2.6
kernel up until around 2.6.10. It was highly broken (call to
uninitialized function pointer). But I needed it. I fixed it and send
the
patch so it works from 2.6.11 and up. If the driver had been
dropped in
the 2.6 series because nobody actively maintained it, I wouldn't have
got
around to fix it at all and was probably forced to use another OS
for my
perpose.
But because the driver was still in there and somebody had made
sure it
was updated along the changes to the API in the 2.6 kernel, it was
easy
for me to fix it although I didn't know so much about the kernel
internals
at that time.
The code will still exist in older kernel releases so if someone
needs to bring it up to date they can. We are more than willing to
take patches to fix any issues.
Let's be clear. I posted a request several weeks ago in which anyone
was free to comment on the various board ports that existed and their
maintainership.
- kumar