Re: Free Linux Driver Development!

[Lee Revell]

On 1/31/07, Mark Lord <lkml@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:00:15 -0500 Theodore Tso wrote:
> ..
> >> More specifically, Dave said that it "seemed rude" to just take the
> >> driver and send updates, but maybe the best way of dealing with
> >> out-of-tree drivers like lirc is to treat the out-of-tree drivers as a
> >> kind of spec release, and just have someone in the community forcibly
> >> take the code, fix it up, and then get it merged.  Maybe it's being
> >> "rude", but so is not responding to requests to get it merged.
>
> I believe a BIG reason why lots of open-source drivers are out-of-tree
> right now, is because lkml is perceived as being wayyyyyy too fussy
> and petty about 80-column lines, brackets, etc.. for new code.
>
> It's just not worth the effort/abuse for many maintainers to pursue it.

That seems like the easy part - it seems like anyone bright enough to
write a working Linux driver would be good enough with their editor or
perl or bash to knock that out in 10 minutes.

I would think rules like "no new ioctls" and "no new /proc entries",
that might seem arbitrary to one who doesn't follow kernel
development, plus the occasionally insulting code reviewer, would be
more of an issue.

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