On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 06:38 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > 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. But we didn't ban non-upstream modules. Instead we made the kernel team the gateway. If the module is good enough to provide to Fedora users, it's good enough to be in the kernel package proper. This gets around the build timing / ordering issue, it prevents newer kernels from causing the module to stop building, it removes the need for gross yum/rpm hacks to handle the packages properly, it removes the need to re-create the initrd after a module update, so on and so forth. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
