[linux-dvb] Re: [v4l-dvb-maintainer] DVB Maintainer
abraham.manu at gmail.com
Mon Apr 16 13:35:59 CEST 2007
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
>> Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
>>> Why do you waste your time looking backward?
>>> Not only is this not useful, in this case it's also _harmful_.
>> When someone flames you in all aspects again and again, you would just
>> watch it go by ?
> Usually yes
I don't think that is entirely true .. but since "usually" ....
>>> Instead of trying to keep the flamewar alive, the right
>>> thing to do (as this is written under the "DVB Maintainer"
>>> subject), is put the personal issues aside and find a way
>>> to integrate the em28xx driver.
>> Would have appreciated your stand, if you had the same stand on other
>> threads as well. (IIRC your stand on the DVB-S2/multiproto threads were
>> completely opposite. You wanted to hold things back)
> That is not true. Your first proposal was crap, yet you asked
> Mauro the merge it and even got ACKs from others. So I
> pointed out that I thought it needs more work.
Ok, if my first proposal was crap, it is crap still. After the driver
was completed _most_ of the stuff had to be done according to the old
proposal, because the delivery system does indeed need them (not just
You were asleep throughout the discussion. For Marcel's request you said
it was okay too. After that you had a dream or something like that and
even apologized for your last minute barging in, also that you didn't
understand about DVB-S2.
It wasn't anyone else's fault that you NACK'd it after asking Mauro to
pull, but yours alone. You could have done it earlier too.. or just kept
quiet. Was a waste of time for so many people involved.
> I also think the whole approach of "we need to merge this API change
> *now* so we can develop DVB-S2 drivers" was flawed. IMHO first you
> have to produce a working driver to prove the API is working, *then*
> it can be merged.
I don't think that's true for a new delivery system. Even after the
driver was developed, it was still flawed, Huh ?
> And if there was a "please review" or "Mauro, please merge" mail
> regarding multiproto recently, I must have missed it.
Sorry. You said you didn't have the time after everything was done,
inspite of many mails sent to you.
If someone NACK's something for a reason and when those things are
fixed, the same person could at least show a bit of courtesy by stating
the same problems are/were fixed.
More information about the linux-dvb