Grover, Andrew wrote:
>>> Proper place to do this discussion is
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> It sounds good in theory. In practice, though, almost all of the
>> design discussions have been occuring in private e-mail.
>> For example, I have seen none of the messages discussing
>> the changes planned for the power management stuff in 2.5,
>> even though these changes will apparantly touch every single
>> modular driver. I know for a fact that the changes planned
>> to enable better implementation of PCMCIA support have
>> gone on between only a few developers. Also, from the
>> announcement from the Security Module folks, I gather that
>> there discussions haven't been held on LKML and aren't
>> planned to migrate here.
>
> IMO, the non-LKML lists exist so that developers can go off and have long,
> boring, highly technical discussions without everyone having to wade through
> it. It's not private email, it's just another list. So, subscribe, or look
> at the archives. Most people don't care about this stuff, so the ones that
> do should opt-in to whatever list.
Yeah, agreed. I was only concerned there might be folks working
at cross-purposes. It looks like maybe I am wrong in thinking
this is concern. Perhaps whatever changes are being contemplated
will be introduced gradually and really won't impact the same
areas of code and, thus, coordination isn't required.
>> So, if you really think that all these module-related design
>> discussions should happen on LKML, we're going to have
>> to convince a bunch of people to move their discussions
>> here. This will not necessarily be easy. I know that the
>> reason that many of these discussions occur between only
>> a few people is that these folks want a decent signal to
>> noise ratio. That's why I proposed a "2.5-module-devel"
>> list. It would allow people who really care about this stuff
>> to coordinate their work.
>
>
> I am not positive that your initial premise is entirely correct. For
> example, it's way too early to say definitively, but right now I don't see
> ACPI or power management requiring any changes to the module architecture.
> (Driver arch maybe, but not module arch)
Well, you'd certainly be in a much better position to know about this
than I am. :-)
> So, maybe you should just copy the two lists (hotplug and security) in
> question?
Okay. From this rather underwhelming response, I'm guessing that
a new list simply isn't going to be very helpful or interesting to the
pertinent developers.
Thanks for letting me know,
Miles
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
