On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Laszlo Papp <lpapp@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 06:59:55PM +0000, Laszlo Papp wrote: >> I think I'll let Jean handle this one. > > Guys, please be a bit more definite. > > We should get over this long ping-pong game. It has been clearly > stated that either way is fine, and there was no objection for months > to either way either, and now the feature is just not moving forward. > This is the first time I have this sorrow experience that I am having > here in hwmon, unfortunately. A lot of effort spent, and nothing got > done. > > As I said before, disagreeing is fine and natural. What is not fine is > wasting people's time for months and not making it clear what the > hwmon maintainers want, and months later after the work, the opposite > is claimed than before. > > I am sorry if it sounds harsh, but currently this is how I see the > situation. If the MFD solution gets rejected, I consider it a huge > maintainer mistake since both of you were involved, and have never > ever spoken up for months that this would not be acceptable. In fact, > as quoted earlier in this thread, the opposite had been said. > > I would like to get over the hwmon situation as soon as possible, so > please guys kindly advise what you would *really* like to see. I do > not really mind who makes the decision, but rejecting months of work > due to miscommunication is still better than continuing the same! (Alternatively, who is the higher-level decision maker over the drivers (and hence driver subsystem maintainers) to ask for making a final decision if you cannot make it? I would hope for this being the last resort, but there is a point where it is necessary to remain productive, in my opinion.) _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
