Future of the Wimedia LLC Protocol (WLP) subsystem/drivers
Subsystems (2)
Hi,
I've have been nominally the maintainer of the Wimedia LLC Protocol (WLP) subsystem and driver since it was originally submitted. I am no longer in a position to even pretend to be a maintainer.
The only usable hardware was an Intel i1480 devices with beta firmware that was never released as a product. Intel have since sold all there UWB/WLP IP and I see little prospect of there ever being hardware commercially available for WLP.
Here are a number of options:
1. Someone else maintains it. Any volunteers?
2. It gets labelled as Orphaned in MAINTAINERS.
3. It gets moved to staging.
4, It gets removed.
If no one says anything I'll submit a patch to Linus to mark it as Orphaned.
David
Signature · 6 lines
David Vrabel, Senior Software Engineer, Drivers CSR, Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Tel: +44 (0)1223 692562 Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ http://www.csr.com/ Member of the CSR plc group of companies. CSR plc registered in England and Wales, registered number 4187346, registered office Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom
Quoted 15 lines · On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:30:47 +0100 David Vrabel wrote:
Hi,
I've have been nominally the maintainer of the Wimedia LLC Protocol (WLP) subsystem and driver since it was originally submitted. I am no longer in a position to even pretend to be a maintainer.
The only usable hardware was an Intel i1480 devices with beta firmware that was never released as a product. Intel have since sold all there UWB/WLP IP and I see little prospect of there ever being hardware commercially available for WLP.
Here are a number of options:
1. Someone else maintains it. Any volunteers?
Quoted 7 lines
2. It gets labelled as Orphaned in
MAINTAINERS.3. It gets moved to staging.
4, It gets removed.
If no one says anything I'll submit a patch to Linus to mark it as Orphaned.
I'd say either 3 or 4.
It could go to staging on it way to removal, but that's not really necessary.
---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
Quoted 23 lines · Randy Dunlap
Quoted 21 lines · On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:30:47 +0100 David Vrabel wrote:
Hi,
I've have been nominally the maintainer of the Wimedia LLC Protocol (WLP) subsystem and driver since it was originally submitted. I am no longer in a position to even pretend to be a maintainer.
The only usable hardware was an Intel i1480 devices with beta firmware that was never released as a product. Intel have since sold all there UWB/WLP IP and I see little prospect of there ever being hardware commercially available for WLP.
Here are a number of options:
1. Someone else maintains it. Any volunteers?
2. It gets labelled as Orphaned in
MAINTAINERS.3. It gets moved to staging.
4, It gets removed.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
If no one says anything I'll submit a patch to Linus to mark it as Orphaned.
I'd say either 3 or 4.
It could go to staging on it way to removal, but that's not really necessary.
cc gregkh
3 or 4 is fine with me, which ever David wants.
thanks,
greg k-h
David Miller
maintainerFrom: Greg KH <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:22:33 -0700
Quoted 26 lines · Randy Dunlap
Quoted 25 lines · On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:30:47 +0100 David Vrabel wrote:
Quoted 23 lines
Hi,
I've have been nominally the maintainer of the Wimedia LLC Protocol (WLP) subsystem and driver since it was originally submitted. I am no longer in a position to even pretend to be a maintainer.
The only usable hardware was an Intel i1480 devices with beta firmware that was never released as a product. Intel have since sold all there UWB/WLP IP and I see little prospect of there ever being hardware commercially available for WLP.
Here are a number of options:
1. Someone else maintains it. Any volunteers?
2. It gets labelled as Orphaned in
MAINTAINERS.3. It gets moved to staging.
4, It gets removed.
If no one says anything I'll submit a patch to Linus to mark it as Orphaned.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
I'd say either 3 or 4.
It could go to staging on it way to removal, but that's not really necessary.
cc gregkh3 or 4 is fine with me, which ever David wants.
I'm fine with either but prefer 4, if we want to resurrect the code for whatever reason it is there in the history and we can just revert the revert commit to get it all back.