On Sun, 2007-12-02 at 02:10 -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 02:04:01AM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> The problem is I really hate adding patches that provide new user interfaces.
> It's easy enough to add it, but it'll be a 'fedora-ism' that doesn't work
> in any other distro, or with an upstream kernel. And what happens
> if someone starts building more things on top of the sysprof exports?
>
> It's the same reason patches that add syscalls get vetoed. We don't
> want to be in a situation where it appears we're locking users into
> running our distro/kernel.
What if the sysprof author offered
a. to maintain the patch in the SRPM (e.g. make sure it works)
b. to work with upstream to either get it his patch in or migrate
to another interface when available
Would that work? Dave? Søren?
David
_______________________________________________
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
