Re: Staging, place holder for better company/community developmentmodel

[Johannes Berg]

On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 15:33 -0700, Greg KH wrote:

> > FWIW, I would MUCH prefer if the staging crap never passed any official
> > mailing lists.
> 
> What do you mean by this?  You don't ever want to see any staging
> patches on any mailing lists?  That doesn't sound helpful.

Staging drivers will typically be an extremely huge amount of crap that
just floods mailing lists. I don't care about those I don't read, but I
would prefer to not have wireless staging drivers cross the wireless
list which makes it seem like somebody is actually interested in those
drivers.

> I can provide a simple procmail rule if you really don't like this kind
> of thing, but that seems pretty extreme...

I can very well filter on my own, thank you; I'm more worried about the
noise for random third parties who then infer that this is something
that somebody is working on and that might be useful to work on for
them. Neither of that is true for any wireless staging driver, they all
require complete rewrites that can, imo, use the old code only for
reference, not for implementation.

johannes

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part