That said, if getting even trivial changes like moving a few functions
around are going to be met with such resistance and come at an
enormous cost, it's *very* tempting to just host it locally and not
submit it upstream at all.
Mauro,
It makes no sense to have Kernel Labs work out of tree. Clearly in some cases
this makes a lot of short term sense but rarely does this scale long term. I can
speak to this from first hand experience. Generally it leads to bit-rot and
unhappy developers, unhappy community and unhappy users.
We are cleanup up the existing tree and fixing major oops prior to a massive
amount of analog work. We've spent the time partitioning the code (like all of
the other drivers) into sub-units -video.c, -dvb.c as this simplifies
peer-to-peer remote development. It breeds commonality between drivers and eases
long-term support for developers familiar with other drivers.
The end goal is to show a clear and concise series of patches showing migration
from the driver as-is to something much more stable and commercial grade. We can
demonstrate a clean implementation and have near-zero development conflicts. I
see no failure on our part.
I see this as positive and pro-active peer-to-peer remote development practices.
In fairness to you, I also understand your comments and they are also valid
concerns. We are mindful of your authority and aware of your needs to keep the
tree clean and optimal. On balance I think we both want the same end goal. Good
code, clean patches, understandable small changes showing slow evolution.
I hope you can see a way forward for the ngene tree that doesn't mean we are
forced to house it away from linuxtv.org. This would be a great pity and against
the spirit of community development.
Best,
- Steve
--
Steven Toth - Kernel Labs
http://www.kernellabs.com
+1.646.355.8490
--
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
