Hi Arjan, > which fundamental change? the fact that you can't use > kernel-source(code) to build external modules? That has been the case > for all the 2.6 rpms, and is a result from the 2.6 buildsystem changes > more than anything else, and was there even before the very first fc2 > test release. I would call the fact that you drop the kernel-source(code) rpm altogether, from which people have been building custom kernels for years a "fundamental change". Technical issues are not the only ones to be considered. It could have just as well be concluded dropping kernel-source(code) is a good idea after consulting the community. Also, the compiling for different architecture issue should have been addressed before making the change. Not consulting the community beforehand carries the risk fundamental issues get overseen. This is why you have a community. This approach makes it look like you don't need the community input as you already know what's best. Which could be true, but then you could just as well discuss it first. (+1 for Stephen's argument.) Another argument to communicate such changes beforehand is that even if this is a superior solution a lot of people will not know about it unless somebody stumbles upon it and brings it up for discussion. The rawhide report is not the appropriate channel for such "fundamental changes". Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research
