2010/1/21 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx>: > HoP wrote: >> Hi Mauro, >> >> 2010/1/20 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx>: >>> HoP wrote: >>>> Hi Mauro, >>>> >>>> Not to hassle you, I'm sure you're very busy. >>>> >>>> But I'm not yet received a response from you on mail with corrected patch. >>>> >>>> Your attention would be appreciated >>> Hi Honza, >>> >>> The patch looks correct to me, but, as I previously mentioned, our policy is >>> to add new features at the kernel driver only together with a driver that >>> actually requires it. This helps to avoid increasing the kernel without need. >>> >>> So, please re-submit it when you have your driver requiring the isl6421 >>> changes ready for submission, on the same patch series. >>> >> >> Are you sure about such policy? >> >> I did small google research and found out the following: >> >> My feeling is different otherwise I don't understand why did you >> accept WITHOUT any word Oliver Endriss' PULL request >> from December 12th: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg13302.html >> >> I'm pointing on Oliver's pull request only because he did very similar >> thing for lnbp21 like I did for isl6421. >> >> You very quickly added his patch to 2.6.33 on December 16th: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg13429.html >> >> So again. If I'm not blind you have accepted same work from him >> but not from me. Please show me what I have overlooked >> and this is not true. >> >> Another possible explanation is that I'm totally unknow. >> >> I hope you have some other explanation otherwise it feels to >> me like elitism. > > As far as I understood, those changes are needed by the mantis driver, that > got committed on the next day, as shown at the commit logs: > > http://linuxtv.org/hg/v4l-dvb/rev/07c36cb88bce > http://linuxtv.org/hg/v4l-dvb/rev/d644727cd528 > > So, on that time I had already a pull request for the mantis driver. > > It is fine if I receive two separate pull requests, one depending of the other. > > That's said, Oliver is the maintainer of isl6421 driver, so he is the one that better > know what bugs are there and what fixes are needed. Due to that, when I receive a > patch from a driver maintainer, I'm inclined to ack with the changes, in the belief > that he is doing the better for the driver. Even so, I review the driver looking > for troubles on his approach taking more care with new exported symbols added and with > new userspace API's that the patch might have. > OK, you beat me. Good bye /Honza -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
