On 5/8/06, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 5/8/06, Tim Burke <tburke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 15:53 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > > > > > > > > >> 1. If it's okay for RH to put nonstandard kernels into Fedora, then > > >> shouldn't it be okay for the community to put nonstandard kernels into > > >> Fedora? If not, why not? > > >> > > > > > > I think the reasons why we don't want to do this have been made quite > > > clear. Its a maintenance nightmare. I already told the OpenVZ folks that > > > we couldn't have a "VZ enabled" kernel package in Fedora unless it went > > > into upstream (or they could convince Dave Jones to include it in his > > > SRPM). > > > > > > > > Just to share some exposure into what it takes to keep a non-standard > > kernel working in the Fedora tree: > > - Pretty much a full-time dedicated highly experienced kernel developer > > to spend the vast majority of their time playing patch monkey to keep up > > with the high rate of upstream change. We have someone doing this role > > for Xen and its more than a fulltime job. Same thing would have to > > happen for an OLPC kernel. Certainly the amount of work is commensurate > > with the nature of the changes. Having seen the RT patch set, that is > Sorry about that.. my mousepad send the email before I even got started. I think that this request may fit into more of an Alternatives project where multiple kernels and other tools might be able to look at. -- Stephen J Smoogen. CSIRT/Linux System Administrator