From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263806AbTL3So4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:44:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263930AbTL3So4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:44:56 -0500 Received: from stat1.steeleye.com ([65.114.3.130]:59844 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263806AbTL3Soz (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:44:55 -0500 Subject: Re: The survival of ide-scsi in 2.6.x From: James Bottomley To: Willem Riede Cc: Linux Kernel Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-9) Date: 30 Dec 2003 12:44:49 -0600 Message-Id: <1072809890.2839.24.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org If people will have me, I am prepared to take on that responsibility. I am just concerned that I may not have enough of a variety of devices to be able to thoroughly test it (unless the DI-30 is the only one :-)). What do people see as the requirements to be able to maintain ide-scsi? Well...there's currently not a long line of people wanting to do this, so feel free to send in patches (at least cc'd to linux-scsi so I can pick them up easily), and we'll see how it goes. In the long term, I think libata will end up assuming much of the role that ide-scsi does now, but since it doesn't interface to a lot of existing motherboard chipsets, we're going to need ide-scsi around for a while at least. James