On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:41:58AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > > > >> So although it's small framework or just subdirectory, we would need > >> someone who can manage the framework to avoid further confusion if > >> necessary. > > > > So maybe it just doesn't need a maintainer, and maybe those the owner > > of the bridge driver should be responsible for choosing the tree which > > it's merged through along with updates. That's how dw-hdmi has been > > managed on the whole. > > > > It also means that the bridge driver maintainer is able to test changes > > to the bridge driver, rather than having some over-arching bridge > > subdirectory maintainer who doesn't have a clue whether the changes > > work on the hardware. > > > > IMHO, having bridge driver authors/maintainers look after their own > > code has many advantages. > > The author just send me a pull request with acks from a git tree > that hopefully both people agreed and tested from. No need to > send this via another maintainer layer. I have in the past "maintained" bridge drivers as part of the panel tree, but I have no objections at all for this to go in via one of the trees where it is used and can actually be tested. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
