Jay Cliburn wrote:Since these changes are not simply moving code around, we really do need full explanations for them, and to understand their need. Blindly copying code from an exterior driver is pointless, and no way at all to run an engineering process. If the driver is not going to get the review and attention necessary, bug fixes and feedback attended-to, then there's not much point in having this driver in the kernel at all. You will only lead yourself to frustration, if you set up a system where changes only flow one way. That's not how Linux development is done at all. Jeff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| debian developer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [patch 00/40] 2.6.23-stable review, driver (sans network) changes |
| Roland Dreier | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 03/37] dccp: List management for new feature negotiation |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
