From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-pv0-f174.google.com ([74.125.83.174]:33412 "EHLO mail-pv0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754247Ab0E0Qoc (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2010 12:44:32 -0400 Received: by pvg3 with SMTP id 3so91918pvg.19 for ; Thu, 27 May 2010 09:44:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100527154350.GA3728@tuxdriver.com> References: <20100527150515.GB2486@tuxdriver.com> <1274974452.20576.20410.camel@macbook.infradead.org> <20100527154350.GA3728@tuxdriver.com> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 09:44:12 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: A mailing list for regulatory wireless-regdb changes To: "John W. Linville" 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 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. Luis