Re: [ACPI] RE: [ACPI-sppt] merge acpi-support into acpi-devel?

On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 10:48:31AM -0400, Brown, Len wrote:
> The archive shows that overall, acpi-support gets 18% the traffic that acpi-devel gets.
> 
> There are newbie questions on LKML, and there is a FAQ to help them.
> I don't see why we shouldn't follow that model.
> 
> The down-side of 2 lists is that people who post to acpi-devel will
> probably get better support, so one wonders what is the advantage of
> having 2 lists.

Personally, I'm really not interested in any of the x86 shitty BIOS IRQ
routing type issues.  I'm interested in the following ACPI things:

 - It has to work on ia64 (that's my day job).
 - Solving some of the impedence mismatches between what ACPI expects
   and what the core kernel provides (eg the PCI config space accessing,
   down_timeout(), etc).
 - Refactoring the ACPI code to work better.

Not that I expect the lists to be arranged for my benefit, but would
anybody else be interested in a list-split along the lines of

 - acpi-x86 (for x86 specific problems)
 - acpi-core (for everything else)

-- 
"It's not Hollywood.  War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or
victory, it is about death.  I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies.
Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf