On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 09:06:35AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 08:11:54AM -0800, Mark Brown wrote: > > This really is very disappointing. > No it isn't. I think we're talking at cross purposes here - I'm saying that this whole situation is disappointing, not a specific decision. > What is really disappointing is the lack of responsive maintainers for the > Samsung stuff. It took _two_ bloody months to get the Samsung platforms This is pretty much what I'm saying is disappointing - in this case the whole fact that we're not managing to get stuff actually merged. It's very frustrating that we're ending up in a situation where getting things applied to the maintainer's tree and into -next (which is usually the end of what you need to do as a patch submitter) isn't enough to actually get the changes pushed upstream. > The only reason something happened was because I stuck a #error into > the Samsung code in linux-next and people started reporting that Samsung > had broken. Yeah, me included. Like I said I'd probably have sent a fix if I'd been able to figure out what the changes the error referred to were. > The alternative was basically Samsung ending up like shmobile is today. > Maybe that's what should have happened to save folk like Arnd such a > horrible job now. So, is there anything that people like me who are contributing to rather than maintaining things can do to help here beyond chasing maintainers? Generally my process is roughly to monitor what goes into -next and chase people if things don't make it in there but that's not working well here as things are appearing in -next. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |