Agreed that we need to make a decision. "Finishing what Kyosti started" means getting it working AND submitting a patch to 2.4. Your option a) may be necessary for the i2c side; for the sensors side, simply adding back the owner and usage_count members of the structs (or were they even taken out?). Remember, sensors was never branched, only i2c. If the fix to i2c-proc is the only thing we need to get the lk2-4 branch of i2c working, go ahead and do that. Whatever we do, it will take some merging. Do you know how to do CVS merging? I don't. Even if we go back to 2.7.0 we will need to merge some stuff from the tree. So what should we do? Mark M. Hoffman wrote: > * Fabrice Bellet <fabrice at bellet.info> [2003-04-13 16:23:38 +0200]: > > >>So I added support for the SiS963 bridge in i2c-sis645.c. The patch is >>attached for version 2.7.0 (merging code from the CVS too). > > > Thank you. You are the second person to submit such a patch. I'm > not sure what to do with it, because CVS tag lk2-4 is broken and > has been abandoned for many weeks now. > > At this point, if nobody is interested in finishing what Kyosti > started, I think we should either a) re-branch from 2.7.0 to support > kernel 2.4 or b) announce in bold type on the sensors homepage that > 2.7.0 is *it* for 2.4. >
