Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 4 Nov 2000 15:26:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 4 Nov 2000 15:26:33 -0500 Received: from wire.cadcamlab.org ([156.26.20.181]:39694 "EHLO wire.cadcamlab.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 4 Nov 2000 15:26:25 -0500 Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 14:26:20 -0600 To: Taco Witte Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: modular kernel Message-ID: <20001104142620.N1041@wire.cadcamlab.org> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from mail@tcwitte.myweb.nl on Sat, Nov 04, 2000 at 03:38:15PM +0100 From: Peter Samuelson Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [yes I feed trolls sometimes, it's fun] [Taco Witte] > Some days ago, I read about the idea of a completely modular kernel. > I think it's a very good idea, because it would make it easier to get > more people work at the same moment, development would go faster. I contend that the barrier to entry is already quite low, as proven by the fact that *I* contribute to kernel development, albeit rather little. What evidence do you have to the contrary? > It would be possible to make groups for a certain part of the kernel > (for example sound, or filesystems, or main) with own group pages > with status info and todo's and own mailinglists (it would divide > this enourmous flow of mail into smaller parts). Run the following command in the Linux source directory: grep '^[LW]:' MAINTAINERS | sort -u | more Then come back with your hot new ideas about having different mailing lists and web pages for each subsystem. Peter - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/