On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 06:38 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Colin Walters wrote: > > I forgot to point out in an earlier message that there is precedent > > for setting up barriers for low-level software, namely the Fedora 3rd > > party kernel driver policy: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/KernelDriverPolicy > > I actually still don't see why we're banning separate kernel module packages > even if they're under a GPLv2-compatible license. Useful stuff like kqemu > with no license or patent issues is being forced into RPM Fusion purely > because of the combination of the above policy and the ban on > separately-packaged kernel modules. This also causes problems with getting > the modules out at the same time as the new kernel which would just not > happen if they were in Fedora and got pushed out with new kernels in > grouped updates. The #1 rationale for banning kernel modules entirely > was "FESCo was rejecting most requests anyway, so it won't change much", > but the option of changing that fact, or even getting rid of the FESCo > approval requirement entirely, never even got considered. I think they're banned b/c a kernel module package means we're not doing the proper job of getting the module in upstream. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
