Return-path: Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.235]:51460 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751079AbYJVJXU (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 05:23:20 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id k40so2864762rvb.1 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 02:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1ba2fa240810220223i4d776b16qb67bfa4bb5733899@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20081022_112338_843591_8E81D5F8) Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:23:19 +0200 From: "Tomas Winkler" To: "Johannes Berg" Subject: Re: New iwlwifi 3945 uCode available Cc: "reinette chatre" , "Marcel Holtmann" , "John W. Linville" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" In-Reply-To: <1224666883.28639.40.camel@johannes.berg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <1224613633.10863.43.camel@rc-desk> <1ba2fa240810211433q2e7a13b2p45cb8d38a74393c9@mail.gmail.com> <1224624899.28639.17.camel@johannes.berg> <20081021213814.GM17268@tuxdriver.com> <1ba2fa240810211453y40739183v84999364c89886ee@mail.gmail.com> <1224627187.9386.103.camel@californication> <1224628088.10863.100.camel@rc-desk> <1224660449.28639.22.camel@johannes.berg> <1ba2fa240810220210w39466f2bobd1d6b32f99b533d@mail.gmail.com> <1224666883.28639.40.camel@johannes.berg> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 11:10 +0200, Tomas Winkler wrote: > >> > I really don't know why we let you get away with this and bitch >> > endlessly when b43 does such a change, to the point where we finally >> > cave in and support both versions. Why should a community-supported >> > driver be held to higher standards? >> >> Patches that we'll support both firmwares from the cummutiy will be >> welcome, as always. > > So you're saying we should let you get away with it and just fix it > ourselves... How about you identify which patch broke it so we stand a > chance? 01f9a21af3644224ecc899adeea31dc00418ddae f93b673fcfe2670ccb22434d2ec7660b9f1c3fb8 But if then we decide the breakage is worse than the new > feature, and revert the patch, you'll scream bloody murder anyway Revert anything you want. so why > do I even bother? Don't now Clearly, so far there's no attempt to hold you to the > same standards we hold community drivers to, and you are in no way > motivated to improve our opinion of you by doing something voluntarily. Your militant language is under my standards Tomas