Openmoko kernel change process (Was: [UPSTREAM] Move backlight handling out of pcf50633 driver)

Andy Green andy at
Mon Oct 20 06:42:27 CEST 2008

Hash: SHA1

Somebody in the thread at some point said:

| There is absolutely no question that OM have absolute power over the git
| repo at - and whether or not people use that repo and
| kernel will be directly related to how "friendly" the maintainers of
| that repo are the to community.

What was unfriendly about my telling the list that changing the
backlight levels is important?  This appeared on our kernel list, it was
not done by private communication.  "Mea Culpa"?

Userspace needs to solve any broken backlight code with hardcoded
constants in anyway I am sure you will agree if you muse about that.

We need to run our own kernel process according to needs of our
products... typically that's the same as the needs of the customers (as
in this case, but I can't explain why right now).  Upstream or not, that
won't change, for example GTA03 will need certain things in its kernel
for "GTA03 support" upstream or not, only implementation details change.

I scratch my bald head when I read some of the things written here lately.

- -Andy
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora -


More information about the openmoko-kernel mailing list