On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 13:28 +0200, Björn Smedman wrote: > I guess you are right here too: my problem is not really with the > regressions, and branching won't fix the preexisting bugs. I think > it's mostly psychology. When I'm about to update to a bleeding edge > snapshot that is only a few days old I get nervous. I have hundreds of > people using those APs and they have every chipset imaginable on their > side. It feels like a recipe for disaster to update from a patched > development snapshot a few months old to another one that is only days > old.
That's not a psychological problem, that's risk management. The more is at stake, the more testing you need. > Any guess when I will be able to run ath9k "as is" from a mainline > kernel along with a stable hostapd release? I believe you should be able to do that now. If some important bug stands in the way, you can ask it to be backported to the stable series. You should actually prefer stable kernels because there is a procedure in place that ensures that fixes go to the stable kernels. There are also many users of stable kernels, which provides for some testing. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin _______________________________________________ ath9k-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
