Conversation

Krzysztof Kozlowski

Edited 9 days ago

When a vendor wants to control upstreaming process and objects to community-led patches, I’ll just point to this brilliant response from @conor:

It’s only better if <vendor name> submits better quality patches (no evidence for that yet) or submits the patches more promptly than others (which clearly has not happened here), and offers review commentary etc at a higher standard and more frequently than a non-employee maintainer would be able to do (there’s no evidence for that so far either, given you’re trying to stall this patchset). Your claim seems to have no merit as there is no proof that you’d do a better job.

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250925-jaundice-uneasy-ff8b3b595879@spud/

2
17
33

@krzk @conor Tagging in @lwn as this looks like a strong candidate for QOTW 🙂

0
0
2
@krzk The annoying thing is that this behaviour does actually work, especially when the people involved are not established contributors. Felt like I was kinda dog-piling there, since you'd already responded - but I was furious reading their mail.
1
1
4
@conor I see now that the stalling-email from vendor partially worked and discouraged community from maintaining the code. Sigh...
1
0
1
@krzk Yup.. Positive aspect is that they're willing to submit patches still and that our collective response to anlogic helped with that.
0
0
1