On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 06:06:59PM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> James Bottomley clearly expressed in that thread that he doesn't want >> to maintain two SCSI target frameworks. So what I propose is that SCST >> is included in the mainline and afterwards that it is evaluated >> whether or not it is desirable to keep other target code in the >> mainline kernel. > > That's not the way it works, sorry. > > The way to get SCST in is to work with the people who care about target > frameworks (which doesn't include me, fwiw). You come to a consensus > about the way to proceed. Normally this will be a gradual migration of > the good bits from SCST into the kernel. In *exceptional* circumstances, > we've replaced one piece of infrastructure with another (eg wireless > midlayers), but those are by no means the preferred ways to go. > > Let me just re-emphasise this bit. You HAVE to work with the existing > people. If you can't come to a common understanding, your code won't > get in. Even if it's better. Which target code is already in the mainline kernel, and who are the maintainers for this code ? I checked the MAINTAINERS file in the 2.6.25 tarball, but in this file I could not find the information I was looking for. Bart. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
