On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:56:47 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
quoted text
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 01:09:14AM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
>> Am 25.10.2007 00:31 schrieb Adrian Bunk:
>> > Generally, the goal is to get external modules included into the ker=
nel.
quoted text
>> > [...] even though it might sound harsh breaking
>> > external modules and thereby making people aware that their code sho=
uld=20
quoted text
>> > get into the kernel is IMHO a positive point.
>>=20
>> This argument seems to start from the assumption that any externally
>> maintained kernel code *can* get into the kernel, which doesn't stand
>> up to  reality. Once you admit that there is code which, for very good=

quoted text
>> reasons, won't ever be accepted into the mainline kernel tree, what yo=
u
quoted text
>> are saying amounts to: "Code that isn't fit to be included in the
>> mainline kernel isn't fit to exist at all."
>=20
> What kind of code is not accepted into the mainline kernel tree for goo=
d
quoted text
> reasons?

- proprietary code
- unmaintained code
- code conflicting with existing kernel structure or policy
- code in which the concerned subsystem maintainers see no benefit
- code which its author is unable and/or unwilling to convert to
  kernel coding standards
- code whose author is unable and/or unwilling to defend it on LKML

quoted text
> What are these reasons?

The details vary, but the fundamental reason is always the same: to
maintain a sufficient level of code quality in the kernel. Point in
case, the recent discussion whether drivers not supporting
suspend/resume should be refused to merge.

quoted text
> What specific code are you talking about?

Some examples, in no particular order: Reiser4, AppArmor, VMware,
the staircase deadline scheduler, the first version of ser_gigaset,
the Matrox HAL module, SuSE's "taint extension". Yes, some of these
are in the kernel now, or have been superseded by other code that
is, but that doesn't invalidate my concern.

quoted text
> I'm trying to compile a list of all known external modules and drivers
> and work to get them included in the main kernel tree to help prevent
> these kinds of things.  If you know of any that are not on the list at:=

quoted text
> 	http://linuxdriverproject.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/OutOfTreeDrivers
> please feel free to add them, or email me with the needed information
> and I will add them to the list.

That's certainly helpful, but I still think there will always be
a number of external modules that cannot be merged right now or at
all, and deliberately making life difficult for out-of-tree code
maintainers in order to coerce them into submitting their code for
inclusion in the kernel will not work, it'll only create bad
feelings.

Thanks,
Tilman

--=20
Tilman Schmidt                    E-Mail: tilman@imap.cc
Bonn, Germany
Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits.
Unge=F6ffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe R=FCckseite)