Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751827AbaLaN1B (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Dec 2014 08:27:01 -0500 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:21837 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751237AbaLaN07 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Dec 2014 08:26:59 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,673,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="631210630" From: "Grumbach, Emmanuel" To: Jiri Kosina , Arend van Spriel CC: Linus Torvalds , Borislav Petkov , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "egrumbach@gmail.com" , "peter@hurleysoftware.com" , "ilw@linux.intel.com" , "Berg, Johannes" , "Larry Finger" Subject: RE: [PATCH] Revert "cfg80211: make WEXT compatibility unselectable" Thread-Topic: [PATCH] Revert "cfg80211: make WEXT compatibility unselectable" Thread-Index: AQHQJINHASoXmCzt7UaJrD69LgOnMJypadiAgAAh4ACAACTaYA== Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 13:26:53 +0000 Message-ID: <0BA3FCBA62E2DC44AF3030971E174FB31B5DD8D8@hasmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <54A2B807.1020202@hurleysoftware.com> <0BA3FCBA62E2DC44AF3030971E174FB31B5DC915@hasmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com> <1419971304.30412.0.camel@egrumbacBox> <20141230212326.GA29263@pd.tnic> <54A328C2.5080606@lwfinger.net> <54A3D955.6020809@broadcom.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.184.70.11] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > On Wed, 31 Dec 2014, Arend van Spriel wrote: > > > You mentioned in the discussion and I quote: "*If* wireless > > maintainers think otherwise, I'll send a revert request to Linus for > > consideration.". However, you did not wait for any response from the > > wireless maintainers nor from the author of the patch you are reverting. > > Seems like an overreaction to me though personally I do not disgree > > with the revert itself. > > My understanding from the whole thread was that Emmanuel disagrees with > the revert, and I consider Emmanuel to definitely belong to the "wireless > maintainers" group. If my understanding was wrong on this, sorry for that. You understanding is wrong. This patch has an author and you could I didn't sign-off the patch which is an obvious indication I am not a "wireless maintainer". You didn't even make the minimal effort to check how this patch should be properly routed. Regardless of all this, I didn't say I disagree, I said that we need to find a way to signal the userland developers that an API will be deprecated at some point. I haven't seen any response / suggestion from you on that. > > One way or another, the revert really is a-must-have, as it causes visible > userspace regressions. I am really surprised that it's causing so lively > discussion and doubts. > > -- > Jiri Kosina > SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/