On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 01:07 +0200, George Kashperko wrote: > Starting from the clean page means another months of no support for > AI-based hw. Oh, wait a second right here. That's not how Linux development works. We want the technically superior solution, not just something that works to get stuff working no matter what. If your patchset works, that's pretty cool. So thanks a lot for getting something to the users that works. Nothing stops distributions from picking up those patches and distributing it to endusers. That doesn't mean we have to adopt it to the mainline, though. > Going cp ssb bcmai; sed s/ssb/bcmai way will make whole > messup. Forking and developing a separate solution is not equivalent to applying cp and sed commands to the codebase. > Ah, well, there might is another 4th way to go if Broadcom will finally > support their bus with their brand code but honestly (no offence to > Broadcom here, just my personal subjective opinion) I dont think I will > be happy to see this code after all that I've already seen. As Henry already replied to this thread, I'm pretty sure that Broadcom is interested in bringing the technically superior solution to the mainline. I do agree, however, that their current "SB" and "BCMAI" code doesn't look superior to your patchset, though. ;) -- Greetings Michael. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
