From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933387AbXBBMvn (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2007 07:51:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933390AbXBBMvn (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2007 07:51:43 -0500 Received: from rzcomm12.rz.tu-bs.de ([134.169.9.59]:62568 "EHLO rzcomm12.rz.tu-bs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933387AbXBBMvn (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2007 07:51:43 -0500 Message-ID: <45C333D7.3000205@l4x.org> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 13:51:35 +0100 From: Jan Dittmer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0pre (Windows/20070130) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pekka Enberg CC: lirc@bartelmus.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] lirc: remove backwards compatibility macro obfuscation (Was: Free Linux Driver Development!) References: <45C31C19.5040200@l4x.org> <84144f020702020332wee0aa69v19d09768f5643779@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <84144f020702020332wee0aa69v19d09768f5643779@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Pekka Enberg wrote: > On 2/2/07, Jan Dittmer wrote: >> Pekka, it would be better if you could sort out most of the >> basic issues with lirc directly with the developers of lirc >> and then prepare a complete patch series and post that to >> lkml. Incrementally adding one driver after another. Posting >> patches to non-existent sources to lkml is pointless. First >> create a discussion base, please. > > What discussion base? You need to get rid of the cruft anyway and now > you have patch to do that. I am not volunteering to sort out _all_ the > issues. I really really welcome your efforts - no doubt. I wanted to express that the patches you posted are simply not suitable for lkml discussion as there was no full patchset for lirc for review posted, prior to your patches. Normal process for new features (and lirc is a new feature so far lkml is concerned) is like (as I understand it): 1. post full patchset 2. duck 3. receive criticism & patches 4. integrate results from 3 5. goto 1 You started at 3. It would be better to start with the whole picture at 1. I hope I made myself clearer now. Jan