On 11/08/2009 02:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 12:58 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: >> On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 14:45 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote: >>> >>> Because we're acting as de facto upstream for what is effectively a >>> piece of abandonware. Grub development is essentially dead. This isn't >>> a nice place to be in as a downstream. >>> >> >> And yet grub2 still doesn't have all the things we need it to have, that >> is in our grub, and seem to still not want our stuff yet. Also not a >> great place to be as a downstream. > > why don't we make it official that we're the new-old-grub upstream and > give it a shiny new name and a website? it's not like we're not the > upstream for half the rest of the stack, it'd hardly be a radical new > venture... Wouldn't it be easier to work with GRUB2 folks to add the missing features we need? Rahul -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
