On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 04:26:46PM -0500, Christopher Blizzard wrote: > But wrt this particular issue, I see it largely as a question of > support. Talking with Brian Stevens, Stein and Tim B they brought up > the suggestion of breaking it out into its own rpm and making it Red > Hat's responsibility - not yours. Keep things moving and if supporting > Xen is really important then these guys will step up to the plate and > carry it themselves. That does seem sensible. In fact, at one stage, we *did* do things this way. There was a separate kernel-xen package, and I never had to worry about it. Concerns grew however about fixes going into one kernel package but not the other. > They certainly can't make it _your_ problem without backing you with the > proper resources to handle it. I'd have loved to have heard that 18 months ago. We might fix this issue, but I want to be sure it doesn't happen again. When the next "must have" half-baked not-upstream feature comes along, I'm seriously going to be pushing back a lot harder than I have done in the past. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
