Kenneth Aafl?y <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I've moved the card specific bttv cruft out of the dst frontend module, > so that it can be moved to the other frontends. > > Made bt878.c be part of the dvb-bt8xx-pci driver, since there are no other > users of this module, at least as far as I know. > > If no-one objects, I'll put it in cvs for testing. I'm too new to btxxx to know whether this code reorganisation makes sense or not and I will not comment on the technical aspect of your patch. On my side, I'm working hard with Manu to get de-scrambling working on Twinhan cards. Making such change right now will make our work much harder as we do not have yet a fully working prototype. As part of this work, Manu is also performing some kind of reorganisation in the dst files. So your patch will clash badly with Manu's work. >From what I see, a lot of people are working on bt8xx. Some of these people are doing interesting work, like your patch. But I fear that the lack of coordination between you will only harm dvb project: conflicting patches are produced which lead to a lot of integration work for other developers. Johannes's work is also probably harder without coordination between developers. So, could you please: - check with the list on the purpose and scope of your patch before sending it to the list (or actually working on it) ? - check with other people involved with btxxx developement whether this is the *right* time to perform such a work ? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that your patch is wrong and is to be rejected, just that the timing could be better. Best regards
