> My offer is going to be this, I'll look after any unforeseen future problems > caused by this rework, and I can be the i2c-mux maintainer. But if being Yay, thanks a lot! > the i2c-mux maintainer turns out to be a huge time-sink, there is no way I > can stay on in the long run. But I guess that is the same for any maintainer > (whose job description does not explicitly include being maintainer). Well, since I became the I2C maintainer in late 2012, i2c-mux was always low-bandwidth: $ git log --pretty=oneline v3.2.. -- drivers/i2c/muxes/ drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c | wc -l 72 And your patch series is already bigger than what was accepted in the last year altogether :) I understand the uncertainty feeling about this step; however, I truly think it is not much work. It is a niche - though, one I'd like to have supported by your expertise. > the mux update. The main commonality of the demux and the preexisting muxes > seems to be that the name includes "mux" and that it is all about i2c. Agreed? Yes, and because they are quite different, I wasn't sure if it a) is not affected at all or b) totally breaks the design. Glad to hear it is a). Thanks again, looks like we have a roadmap now for getting this series in \o/ Wolfram
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
