В Fri, 20 Jan 2012 17:03:01 +0400 Nikolai Zhubr <n-a-zh...@yandex.ru> пишет:
> Hello Alexander, > > 20.01.2012 13:01, Alexander Gordeev: > [trim] > > > > IMO a separate repository (or adoption into staging) would be better > > because there are too many interested parties and also the main dwc-otg > > development happens not in openwrt. > > > > Where does it happen? > > I've actually got a feeling that in fact no real development is now > happening, but rather some manufacturers and interested users make their > copies (of basically the same thing), reformat tabs and whitespace all > over 200k lines of code as they feel cool, then in some cases introduce > several random 3-line additions/fixes in order to make their specific > device just do what they need at the moment... and finally (sometimes) > publish this as "new shining" version. Now this is NOT a development, > IMHO. I'd be happy if you prove me wrong however. You are right, no need to argue. :) However, there were at least several attempts to push dwc-otg to mainline through linuxppc-dev list. This is what I meant. > The only excuse I'd see for creating yet another repository is if it > appears too hard (or too long) to get stuff accepted to openwrt (AFAICS > openwrt maintainers are somewhat overburdened already, but no idea how > much really) I think the real goal is to have this driver in the mainline kernel and then it will be in openwrt automatically. Ok, it would be cool to merge at least those several implementations inside openwrt (octeon, ramips, etc). But there are others too so I think this attempt should not be bound to Openwrt or any other project or we will always find different drivers all other the net. -- Alexander _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
