[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Plan for tomorrows (20070726) FESCO meeting



On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 17:17 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> I tend to say that approach is fine for you, Hans and some other
> developers that are familiar with kernel-coding as those people have
> shown to be able to get code upstream and know how to work with
> upstream.

Yes, although I'd phrase it as "that approach is fine for anyone who
we'd actually want maintaining kernel code with the 'Fedora' name on
it". 

>  But the code in question IMHO should show potential for a
> nearby upstream merge before it's being added.

Absolutely.

> But users and packagers want some modules that do not head upstream in
> the near future -- let's take the lirc kernel-modules as example,
> where the lirc-upstream afaik is not actively working on getting the
> code into linus kernel. Nobody else is doing that either. I'd prefer
> to not have stuff like that in fedora's kernel rpm, as that could soon
> and in a major maintenance nightmare, which we all want to avoid
> afaics. 

It doesn't become any _less_ of a nightmare just because you ship it
separately. If we don't want it Fedora's kernel RPM, then we don't want
it in Fedora at all.

-- 
dwmw2


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]