Hi Greg, On Tuesday, 9 July 2024 at 10:27, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 06:00:46AM +0000, nmi wrote: > > > Hi Luis, > > > > On Monday, July 8th, 2024 at 23:42, Luis Chamberlain mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > I'm starting to feel the same way about modules, but modules requires > > > more work than the firmware loader. And since I also know Andreas has > > > already a lot on his plate, I'm at a cross roads. My above request for > > > the firmware loader made sense to the person working on the firmware > > > loader changes, but who would help on the modules side of things? And > > > does this request make sense to help scale? > > > > > > The rationale here is that a rust binding means commitment then also > > > from fresh blood to help co-maintain review C / Rust for exising code > > > when there is will / desire to collaborate from an existing C maintainer. > > > > > > I realize this may be a lot to ask, but I think this is one of the > > > responsible ways to ask to scale here. > > > > I am not sure I am the right person for the task, because as you say, > > I have a lot on my plate. But perhaps lets schedule a call so I can > > get a sense of the required effort. > > > Kernel development is done through emails, not calls :) This is such a confusing statement to me. Of course people are using video calls and even meeting up in real life, to discuss matters of kernel development and communicate technical details? Perhaps you could clarify a bit more what you are trying to communicate? > > If a submitter isn't willing to maintain the code they submit, then it > should be rejected as maintance is the most important part. Unless I misunderstand something, Luis requests is about the C code that is already in the kernel, not the code I submitted now. Of course I will maintain the code I submit, if required. Best regards, Andreas
