Hi All, Harald and I were recently talking about kdbus and how it plays into Fedora. Right now, the kernel-playground COPR is carrying the kdbus patches, but that isn't widely used and isn't included in a broad test base. Obviously our distribution is heavily entwined with D-Bus and we were looking to see if it was possible to help kdbus testing and development by doing some kind of integration within Fedora itself. I promised Harald I would talk it over with the other Fedora kernel maintainers and after a brief discussion we came up with the following possible proposal. If Fedora were to carry kdbus in any form, the following things would be required: 1) There would be a single canonical location to track kdbus development. After talking with Harald, that should be the upstream tree that gregkh is using to submit patches. 2) Harald's team (systemd, etc) would commit to testing the system both with and without kdbus active. Obviously we do not want to enforce reliance on something as core critical as kdbus while it is still being actively developed upstream. That could cause a lot of deviation down the road and it isn't the aim here. 3) kdbus would only be carried in the rawhide branch until it is merged upstream. As a concrete example, if kdbus was not merged in the upstream kernel at the time rel-eng creates the F23 branches, then Fedora 23 will never get kdbus. It will be carried in rawhide and rawhide only until it's accepted upstream. The maintainers actually hope this does get merged but we want to make sure we are prepared to drop this without causing too much trouble if needed. 4) After discussing a bit with the rest of the Fedora kernel maintainers, we would carry an additional patch that would require 'kdbus-enabled' to be specified before the kernel would allow kdbus to be loaded (or similar mechanism). This would focus the main testing effort for all the default images to remain as they are today, while easily allowing the plumbing layer developers access to kdbus for their enablement testing. These conditions would hopefully help the Fedora kernel maintainers avoid some of the pitfalls of carrying a large chunk of out of tree code and if they're all met we feel fairly comfortable with doing this. We wanted to send this out for a bit wider discussion and review before proceeding with it, and I agreed to start this thread so here we are. Harald, does the above look like what you were envisioning when we talked earlier? josh _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
