Hi Mauro, On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 07:25:59 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 09:25:29 +0100 > Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hans made a poll some weeks ago with regards to the interest developers > > and users have in supporting pre-2.6.22 kernels and the results were > > pretty clear: this is something almost nobody is interested in. So I am > > curious, what are we waiting for before we drop support these old > > kernels? > > From the comments posted at lwn.net, it seems that there are more people > interested on keeping backport support. Pointer? The key question IMHO is: are these people willing to contribute their time to make it work? If not then their opinion is only mildly interesting. > Also, from my side, not supporting > 2.6.18 will break my production environment, and for sure this is something I > don't want. I can understand that you want a rock-solid environment for your daily work. However I fail to see why that environment also needs to be the target for your development. I have a separate system for this. > Anyway, I've already provided an skeleton of a backport solution for pre-2.6.22, on an > experimental tree, based on a driver that Hans provided me, with what he thinks > it will be the way the new drivers will look alike and what's needed to keep it > working with 2.6.22 or lower. > > Since people are still busy with the i2c conversion I didn't have any feedback > yet about the backport tree, nor I think people will have enough time to test > this before 2.6.30 rc cycle, I suspect that the tree changes (and probably > including moving it to a full git-based deployment model) will likely be > postponed, since we'll need to adjust the entire development environment, and > this takes time that I won't have during this merging cycle. Agreed. -- Jean Delvare -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
