[lkml]   [2009]   [Nov]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [announce] new rt2800 drivers for Ralink wireless & project tree
    On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 07:30:13PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > On Friday 06 November 2009 18:58:56 Ivo van Doorn wrote:

    > > the merged for those drivers after the asurance that it was only merged
    > > to please the users so developers could focus on the rt2x00 version of
    > > the driver.
    > Could somebody please explain me (in the public or in the private) what is
    > the reason behind whole affair about staging drivers because all the time
    > I feel like I'm missing some important detail here.

    I'm not 100% sure what you are asking, but I think you want to know
    the basis for general objections from the people that hang-out on
    linux-wireless and/or the rt2x00 team specifically?

    I don't think anyone[1] has overwhelming objections to drivers in
    staging for devices that have no other driver available. The main
    objection is that drivers/staging steals users and (and often
    developers) from the non-staging drivers, reducing the amount of
    testing and development they get. In the effort to help some users,
    drivers/staging effectively prolongs the amount of time those users
    have to go without properly supported drivers. Much worse, none of
    the wireless drivers in drivers/staging seem to have generated an
    actual mergeable[2] wireless driver.

    Further, the wireless drivers in drivers/staging are completely
    isolated from the wireless infrastructure developments we've been
    making over the past few years. The longer they live, the longer
    wireless extensions will linger, the longer custom rfkill solutions
    persist, and the longer we have multiple 802.11 stack implementations.

    Finally, bug reports from drivers/staging are an unwelcome distraction
    in bugzilla and the wireless mailing lists. Not only do those drivers
    generate (often wierd) bugs, we get the privilege of looking like
    jerks for refusing to deal with those reports even though we objected
    to including the drivers in the first place.

    It is little wonder to me why the linux-wireless folks oppose



    [1] Actually, I _know_ there are people who object to all of
    drivers/staging, but few of those are actively and vigorously objecting
    to it.

    [2] A mergeable driver should respect and/or utilize existing wireless
    infrastructure rather than duplicating it, as well as meeting general
    standards of maintainability. Preferably it would have someone to
    stand behind it as a maintainer as well.
    John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you might be all we have. Be ready.

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-06 20:03    [W:0.026 / U:1.072 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site