From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-iw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:57398 "EHLO mail-iw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935108Ab0HFTdV (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2010 15:33:21 -0400 Received: by iwn33 with SMTP id 33so1532323iwn.19 for ; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 12:33:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20100527150515.GB2486@tuxdriver.com> <1274974452.20576.20410.camel@macbook.infradead.org> <20100527154350.GA3728@tuxdriver.com> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 12:32:59 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: A mailing list for regulatory wireless-regdb changes To: "John W. Linville" , Johannes Berg Cc: David Woodhouse , linux-wireless , Michael Green , David Quan , Emmanuel Grumbach Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:43 AM, John W. Linville > wrote: >> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 04:34:12PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: >>> On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 11:05 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: >>> > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 01:15:50AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >>> > > David, can I trouble you for a mailman wireless-regdb mailing list on >>> > > infradead.org? This would be used by those who are not developers and >>> > > do not need to be subscribed to linux-wireless. An example are >>> > > regulatory guys at different companies and generally interested >>> > > people/developers on the topic. This should hopefully accelerate the >>> > > turn around time for reviewing of patches and also a good placeholder >>> > > for us to go back and check the discussions that went on about this. >>> > >>> > Is this really necessary? >>> >>> Feel free not to use it :) >> >> Just hoping to avoid unnecessary confusion -- I suppose it is fine >> if that is what people want... > > I do not know how else to help speed up review without having to wait > for a intermediary delay of someone at a company forwarding some > regulatory changes e-mail to a person who is supposed to review them. > With the list we would have a direct way for people to communicate > with the folks who do care about regulatory and who may have roles who > do that. > > If people do not mind the constant "please give us a few days" e-mails > then things work without the list but then we (at least Atheros) just > need to make sure regulatory change e-mails do get to the proper folks > for review because we (Atheros) is committed to reviewing these > changes. BTW I found a use for this list now, to archive some initial e-mails from Michael / others regarding reguatory changes. This information would need to be parsed and then submitted in patch form but it should also provide us with a URL reference on a regulatory related mailing list for some details for commits on wireless-regdb. I'll try it out next and you guys tell me if its OK. PS. I'll be subscribing a few of you guys to this list now :) Luis