On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 11:51:19AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote: > > You appear to have a very different model of how non-profits might > > approach the Linux kernel --- could you go into more detail about why > > they might want to contribute to the Linux kernel, and how we might > > encourage them to contribute more engineering effort? > > > > Sure. Here's a recent example, in which a not-for-profit volunteer might > have been granted an opportunity to work upstream: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/129c9d5e-213a-80c9-092e-dc1dcf38ae3e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > The driver in question may may not be commercially viable, but that > doesn't matter, if the intention is to foster new maintainers and increase > the talent pool. And the problem ostensibly being addressed in the Linux > Contributor Maturity Model is a shortage of maintainers. I would NEVER recommend ANYONE picking up obsolete hardware and trying to get it to work to maintain the driver if NO ONE is actually using the stuff. That should not be for a not-for-profit to maintain as obviously, no one uses it. It's up to those that need/use the code to help maintain it, don't ask not-for-profit groups to maintain and support code that no one uses, that's a sure way to waste resources all around. So that's a good example of how our ecosystem works properly, if no one needs the code, it gets dropped. Don't ask for it to come back without real users who are invested in it please. thanks, greg k-h
