On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 12:17 -0800, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > Yes, there are partisans on every side, and we throw our weight behind > softmac for the time being. > > I hope that it was thought out well between DaveJ, dwmw2, and jgarzik, > because it may be a mistake, like you said. The question is, how probable. > I have to say, I am not familiar with the code yet enough to know how > different softmac and devicescape are. As Dave said, this isn't really an endorsement, and the fact that it's in rawhide for the moment doesn't necessarily mean that it'll end up in FC5. But I think the softmac code is the best bet for now -- the others don't seem particularly interested in working to extend and fixing what we have in the kernel tree at the moment; they only want to replace the Intel IEEE 802.11 stack entirely. While they may well be right, that just isn't the way that kernel development normally works. It seems a fairly safe bet that they'll still be wittering about how much better their solution is while Johannes improves softmac to the point where it overtakes the others, and gets it merged. -- dwmw2 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
