Hi all, I will reverse a part of this e-mail to make replying easier. On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Please have a look into our RFC implementation and study it carefully >> to learn why it is the better (IMHO more flexible, easier to maintain, more >> modular) approach. Even if you don’t like phandles. > > It was also NAKed by device tree maintainers. This may be true, I can't recall those specific mails... > You promised to shut up. But this is uncalled for. IIRC there was, indeed, a long technical discussion about how to connect the Bluetooth chip to the 'UART'. I've seen Neil patches, and I've seen patches by Nikolaus. Both appear to have their problems. I think it's fair to: - Listen carefully to all arguments. - Have a benevolent dictator, which we have, look into the problem - Only 'shut up' after a thorough technical analysis has been made about both approaches to the problem. Both may have their merit in a number of ways. Don't just close your eyes, put your fingers in your ears and say 'I can't hear you!'. We are all adults, or at least, we should be in behaviour. The Linux system has grown so much _beacuse_ of people working together. Calling each other names and exiling them will _not_ solve the problem. Christ van Willegen -- 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
