The sad story of the em28xx driver
The sad story of the em28xx driver
Posted Nov 12, 2008 6:34 UTC (Wed) by cjayachandran (subscriber, #45677)Parent article: The sad story of the em28xx driver
I distinctly remember many devices having legacy as well as newer drivers supporting more devices, it does not hurt anybody to get his new driver in as an alternate driver and give the choice to the user.
Posted Nov 12, 2008 9:11 UTC (Wed)
by khim (subscriber, #9252)
[Link] (3 responses)
If you are abusing developers's and users's trust it becomes suddenly
much harder to integrate code in kernel. Take look on the story with
Reiserfs and Reiser4: Hans promised to work with the community on Reiserfs
and so after long deliberation it was included in kernel. After few years
he started to close bugs and feature requests with "use reiser4"
(effectively abandoning users) and stopped reiserfs support (when something
went wring he pointed out that the same thing worked perfectly with
previous version of kernel and basically refused to debug and fix problems
thus abandoning developers). This made inclusion of reiser4 more-or-less
impossible: since it was pretty clear that reiser4 will be abandoned once
it'll be included all problems which usually don't act as merge blockers
(because kernel developers know they can be fixed later) were declared as
such (because it was not clear if Hans and his command will try to fix them
after merge and history showed that he'll probably not bother). And in most cases newer drivers support more hardware, not less. Kernel
developers are quite reluctant to include driver which works on subset of
hardware just because driver developer is not interested with community
work. If there are technical reasons to have two drivers it's Ok, but if
the reasons are political... it's different story. Multiple drivers are
easily accepted as temporary solution, but then someone must merge support
for other hardware - and then we have "reiserfs situation" where developer
works for it's own feature and against all others...
Posted Nov 14, 2008 23:25 UTC (Fri)
by giraffedata (guest, #1954)
[Link] (2 responses)
Is it actually a requirement for driver inclusion that future support be lined up? That seems to be the opposite of the open source process. Rather, a developer puts code into the mainline so that the whole rest of the world can maintain it. In particular, users of the code — people with a material interest in it — maintain it. If the code doesn't get maintained and becomes unusable, we just drop it back out.
The article mentions the confusion factor of having two similar drivers. I can think of another drawback: division of development and test effort. All of these are weak.
Mauro doesn't explain his reason for not wanting both. He just says:
That's non sequitur to me.
Posted Nov 14, 2008 23:32 UTC (Fri)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link] (1 responses)
there have been many examples of alternate drivers for hardwar being in the kernel, very few of them have worked out well in the long run, so kernel devs don't want to do more of it.
Posted Nov 15, 2008 5:30 UTC (Sat)
by mrec (guest, #41847)
[Link]
http://mcentral.de/hg/~mrec/em28xx-new/shortlog
just check the list of contributors, and the maintainer hard fights against it now. The reason for the big patch has always been that the code had to be rebased because the maintainer basically didn't care about anything there.
Another example
http://linuxtv.org/hg/v4l-dvb/rev/dc22320bb695
I don't see any pull request on the mailinglist, Mauro does it offlist excluding everyone else from it. Ok I acknowledge that is what's wanted and how it should be done.
Markus
It's same as with Reiser4
If I follow your analogy, you're saying that it would be bad to include Markus's new driver alongside the existing one because Markus would eventually abandon it in favor of working on yet another new driver.
It's same as with Reiser4
Both upstream and the 4 duplicated drivers have similar functionality. Also,
the upstream driver is actively maintained. So, there's no sense on accepting
those duplicated drivers.
It's same as with Reiser4
It's same as with Reiser4
It's about that this code has been available for years