Re: [PATCH 02/22] Firmware interface code for IB device.

[Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>]

    Greg> Sorry, I didn't mean to say "private", but rather,
    Greg> "seperate".  Doing kernel development in a seperate
    Greg> development tree from the mainline kernel is very
    Greg> problematic, as has been documented many times in the past.

As a general rule I agree with that.  However, the openib svn tree
we're talking about is not some project that is off in space never
merging with the kernel; as Christoph said, it's really just a staging
area for stuff that isn't ready for upstream yet.n

Perhaps it would be more politically correct to use git to develop
kernel code, but in the end that's really just a technical difference
that shouldn't matter.

    Roland> Distro politics are just distro politics -- and there will
    Roland> always be pressure on distros to ship stuff that's not
    Roland> upstream yet.

    Greg> Luckily the distros know better than to accept this anymore,
    Greg> as they have been burned too many times in the past...

OK, that's great.  But now I don't understand your original point.
You say there are people putting pressure on distros to ship what's in
openib svn rather than the upstream kernel, but if the distros are
going to ignore them, what does it matter?

And this thread started with me trying to help the IBM people make
progress towards merging a big chunk of that svn tree upstream.  That
should make you happy, right?

 - R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/