Subject: Re: Path forward for NFC in the kernel

From: Jakub Kicinski <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2026 20:03:35 -0700

On Wed, 22 Apr 2026 15:11:16 +0200 David Heidelberg wrote:
> Yes, this is broadly in line with what I had in mind. To clarify the “limited 
> reviews and basic maintenance” phrasing: that was more an attempt to set 
> expectations conservatively. I’m prepared to take on the responsibilities you 
> outlined — maintaining a tree, collecting and triaging patches, and sending 
> regular pull requests.
> 
> Regarding reviews and responsiveness: I can do the 48h turnaround for initial 
> feedback on submissions (excluding weekends, and occasional travel), and I’ll 
> make sure no patch sits unattended. For more complex changes where my current 
> NFC-specific knowledge may be a limiting factor, I’ll seek input rather than let 
> things stall.

Sounds good. The discussion taking long is perfectly fine. Main concern
to us is not hearing any response for a long time. Then we have to guess
whether the maintainer is planning to respond, or AWOL.

> I’m also planning to ramp up my familiarity with the NFC stack as I go, so I 
> expect both the quality and depth of my reviews to improve over time.
> 
> If that works for you, I’ll proceed with setting up a public tree and start 
> tracking incoming patches.

Works! :)