From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270662AbTGNSRg (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:17:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270680AbTGNSRg (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:17:36 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:22452 "EHLO gate.crashing.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270662AbTGNSRe (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:17:34 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 13:30:16 -0500 (CDT) From: To: Marcelo Tosatti cc: lkml , benh@kernel.crashing.org Subject: Re: radeonfb patch for 2.4.22... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 ajoshi@kernel.crashing.org wrote: > > > > > Hi Marcelo, > > > > Is there any particular reason why you decided to merge Ben H.'s radeonfb > > update instead of the one I sent you? > > I've decided to CC lkml because I think there are other people interested > in this discussion. > > I merged his version because he sent me your update (0.1.8) plus his code > (which are useful fixes he has been working on). Which is what the original 0.1.8 patch included, his fixes were included. > > It seems things are broken now due to a missing header, but he also sent > me that. There was no missing header, if you see the patch I sent you (about 3 times), the header file is in there. > > Do you have any objections to his fixes ? > Besides the obvious version changes and difficulty maintaining a driver where anyone seems to be able to change it in the official tree, the objections were deteremined and fixed in the patch I sent you. Refresh my memory as it seems things have changed in kernel patch submission process: There is someone called a driver author or maintainer, this person recieves patches for fixes from various people, he/she then compiles them into a single patch and submits it to the kernel tree maintiner. However nowdays it seems the kernel tree maintainer has the descretion to accept patches from anyone how puts up a fight, is this the case nowdays? If so then please let me know, so I don't waste anymore of my time on this driver and let someone else play these silly games and maintain it. ani