Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 08:41:49AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
>
>> So one question I have: Fork, or Evolve?
>
>
> I say evolve, but do it in 2.5. It's not a big deal if things break
> badly in 2.5 and that "forces" all the usb developers to get it working
> again properly :)
Hi,
Yeah. This sounds like a good course of action. Basically,
this IS forking the tree, in the sense that the 2.5 tree is
the fork. Then, when it has stabilized, we can backport,
hopefully, the modified HCDs. IMVHO, this should be a goal
that we consider when making the changes in the 2.5 tree.
It would be a major bother for the HCD developers if they had
to put bandaids on the HCDs in 2.4.x for the entire life cycle
of the 2.4.x tree, which is likely to be at least another
two years. It would be far better for us to get solid HCDs,
with consistent behavior, developed and backported as soon as
possible.
Miles
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
