On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Simon Kenyon <simon@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 17:33 +0200, Markus Rechberger wrote: >> As from my side I have to write it was a good move for the em28xx to >> make it independent especially >> since business customers use the improved version now and don't have >> to fear any uncoordinated >> breakage. > > as i said before (and to which you did not respond), this may be good > for you, but it is not good for the rest of us. You seem to forget that some developers broke kernel modules which the em28xx depends on. Noone cared to fix it even after pointing out to the bug (nor to revert anything), breaking it was easy. You might have a single device and don't get the whole impact on everything there. That I decline the work of a community wouldn't be true either, I'm glad about any participation the patches show up a constant contribution by the community which doesn't fight and it's smoothly getting in there - but in a managed manner. Try to get any v4l device work on the Acer Aspire One, you'll very likely fail with a couple of things there. We're doing full service on everything not just the driver, without having an impact on the rest of the system. Anyway I'd appreciate to get back to the topic again and the question which I pointed out to, how many devices are supported by Steven's patch and how many by the work which Manu used to managed for years with a couple of people. There are multiple ways which can lead to success, the beauty of a patch or framework won't matter too much (nevermind if Steven's or Manu's work seems to be more prettier to someone). Markus _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
