On 28.01.2011 10:23, Kurt Van Dijck wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 08:07:11PM +0100, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: >> ps. generally adding some new infrastructure to the networking stuff without >> the 'user' for this infrastructure is a no-go. There had been several rejects >> from Dave when people tried to integrate support for hidden out-of-tree >> sources. What about contributing your current j1939 source and discussing >> this >> here on the ML and make first steps on the SVN? Out-of-tree developments are >> hard to maintain ... and surely j1939 is a non-differentiating protocol - >> therefore i also added my ISO 15765-2 implementation to get a better feedback >> from the community on my work. > > well, I resumed work on j1939 this year. Our intention is to start > contribution > in the next several weeks. I felt that it was better to contribute a working > prototype to discuss about, than having a non-functional piece of code. > > With the addition of netlink, few modification in CAN itself are required. Is > socketCAN svn the place to do so?
IMO the very CAN specific discussion on a new protocol for PF_CAN is something for the SocketCAN ML first. When we commonly agreed how the j1939 support could be integrated best, we should ask the netdev guys for feedback ... Regards, Oliver _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
