John W. Linville wrote:
> Nevertheless, I think it is time for some changes. I have been
> the wireless maintainer for a long time, and I personally would
> like to develop in a different direction. Plus, I think that Linux
> will benefit from having some fresh blood involved in more of the
> maintenance duties. I will be stepping aside to let that happen.
Thanks to you both the Linux wireless subsystem as well as the wireless
community has improved so much from what you started. You will be missed.
Thank you for all your efforts and I hope you still hang around :)
> As for the wireless driver patches, I have asked Kalle Valo
> to handle patch review and merge duties for everything under the
> drivers/net/wireless directory. This will now include not only the ath
> patches he already manages, but other drivers that don't have trees
> such as mwifiex, rt2x00, rtlwifi, and others. For consistency, the
> iwlwifi tree will also be merged through Kalle's new tree. I expect
> that Kalle will announce any relevant details in a follow-up message.
I have created two trees, wireless-drivers and wireless-drivers-next:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/wireless-drivers.git/
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/wireless-drivers-next.git/
The trees work similarly like John's wireless and wireless-next trees, the
former only for important bugfixes to -rc releases and the latter for the
rest going to the next release.
I still need to ask both linux-next and kbuild maintainers to add these
trees to their list of trees to test from, but I hope that to happen in
the next few days.
There's no need to CC me on the patches, I can pick the patches from the
mailing list. Actually in the future I'm hoping to use patchwork[1] for
managing patches, but my access request is still pending in helpdesk's
queue. I'll send a separate email once I start using patchwork. For the
time being I just use email to apply patches.
For ath6kl and ath10k there will be no changes. I will maintain ath.git
tree separately and just periodically merge that tree to
wireless-drivers-next.
I'll try to make this transition period as smooth as possible but some
glitches might happen, like missing patches and so on. So please keep your
eyes open and let me know if you spot any problems or I missed something.
Kalle
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
Thank you for great work, John. :)
Although I met you one time when in New Orlean Linux wifi summit, that
was great to meet every cool guys there. :P
Thanks,
Matt Chen
2014-12-22 1:07 GMT+08:00 John W. Linville <[email protected]>:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:50:40AM +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote:
>
>> >The trees work similarly like John's wireless and wireless-next trees, the
>> >former only for important bugfixes to -rc releases and the latter for the
>> >rest going to the next release.
>>
>> So are you dropping the wireless-testing tree? From earlier IRC discussion I
>> figured that tree was still in demand.
>
> I still plan to maintain a version of wireless-testing for some amount of time.
>
> John
> --
> John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
> [email protected] might be all we have. Be ready.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:50:40AM +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> >The trees work similarly like John's wireless and wireless-next trees, the
> >former only for important bugfixes to -rc releases and the latter for the
> >rest going to the next release.
>
> So are you dropping the wireless-testing tree? From earlier IRC discussion I
> figured that tree was still in demand.
I still plan to maintain a version of wireless-testing for some amount of time.
John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
[email protected] might be all we have. Be ready.
On 12/18/14 11:55, Kalle Valo wrote:
> John W. Linville wrote:
>
>> Nevertheless, I think it is time for some changes. I have been
>> the wireless maintainer for a long time, and I personally would
>> like to develop in a different direction. Plus, I think that Linux
>> will benefit from having some fresh blood involved in more of the
>> maintenance duties. I will be stepping aside to let that happen.
>
> Thanks to you both the Linux wireless subsystem as well as the wireless
> community has improved so much from what you started. You will be missed.
> Thank you for all your efforts and I hope you still hang around :)
Congrats with your maintainer role.
>> As for the wireless driver patches, I have asked Kalle Valo
>> to handle patch review and merge duties for everything under the
>> drivers/net/wireless directory. This will now include not only the ath
>> patches he already manages, but other drivers that don't have trees
>> such as mwifiex, rt2x00, rtlwifi, and others. For consistency, the
>> iwlwifi tree will also be merged through Kalle's new tree. I expect
>> that Kalle will announce any relevant details in a follow-up message.
>
> I have created two trees, wireless-drivers and wireless-drivers-next:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/wireless-drivers.git/
>
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/wireless-drivers-next.git/
>
> The trees work similarly like John's wireless and wireless-next trees, the
> former only for important bugfixes to -rc releases and the latter for the
> rest going to the next release.
So are you dropping the wireless-testing tree? From earlier IRC
discussion I figured that tree was still in demand.
> I still need to ask both linux-next and kbuild maintainers to add these
> trees to their list of trees to test from, but I hope that to happen in
> the next few days.
>
> There's no need to CC me on the patches, I can pick the patches from the
> mailing list. Actually in the future I'm hoping to use patchwork[1] for
> managing patches, but my access request is still pending in helpdesk's
> queue. I'll send a separate email once I start using patchwork. For the
> time being I just use email to apply patches.
I see. I used to send patches To: the maintainer and Cc: the mailing
list following SubmittingPatches documentation. I can change my workflow
so let me know if I should.
Regards,
Arend