Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: zr36067 driver maintainership (was: [PATCH 1/2] zr36067: Convert to new-style i2c device binding)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


> As for the maintainer, it's not that I don't want to, it's more that I
> feel that I'm currently not the best person to do it anymore. Mauro,
> if I remove my patches, will you send patches upstream or will they
> get dropped and ignored?

I'm not sure what you've meant by "patches" above.

Being you the driver maintained or not, I'll keep accepting patches for 
the driver as usual. When I receive a patch from a maintainer driver, I 
ask the submitter to get the maintainers ack, except if the patch is 
change at V4L core that needs to be reflected on every driver.

When the patch is for a driver that is not maintained for a long time, I 
generally just add a a "CC:" field at the patch.  This way, linuxtv 
mailbomb script will forward the patch to the maintainer, for him to know 
about it. If he manifest about the patch before I merge it on my -git 
tree, I can revert it, complement or add his ack there. If he didn't 
manifest, I just send it upstream.

Of course, it is better for me if I know in advance that someone is not 
interested anymore on maintaining a driver, since I can just commit the 
patches without CC you ;)

The advantage of removing you from MAINTAINERS is that someone else can be 
added there. The better is to choose someone interested on maintaining it 
and just replacing one name by another. Drivers with status "unmaintained" 
may attract some janitor's patch to remove it in the future. Of course, 
I'll nack such proposal.

>I want to prevent the second from happening,
> the driver is in a reasonable state (me and Laurent did a lot of work
> on that).

Although I don't have any Zoran card here, this is the impression I have, 
since I never seen a bug report for it ;)

> It's not perfect, for example the i2c-driver-interaction is
> still v4l1, but other than that it works reasonably well. I'd like to
> make sure the driver stays in the kernel for the foreseeable future.

This is something that needs to be solved, since there are some plans of 
removing V4L1 support on Kernel. We'll try to port the remaining drivers, 
but, if not succeeded, we may just remove the legacy drivers.

However, Jean is interested on such conversion. Hopefully, he'll do this 
task. Of course, I'm here to help.

Cheers,
Mauro.

_______________________________________________
v4l-dvb-maintainer mailing list
v4l-dvb-maintainer@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/v4l-dvb-maintainer

[Linux Media]     [Older V4L]     [Linux DVB]     [Video Disk Recorder]     [Asterisk]     [Photo]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Util Linux NG]     [Xfree86]     [Free Photo Albums]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Women]     [ALSA Users]     [ALSA Devel]     [SSH]     [Linux USB]

-->
Add to Google Powered by Linux

Google PageRank Checking tool