On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 01:18:19PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Questions: > > - Should a kernel module where the upstream has no plans of merging > with the upstream kernel be allowed in extras? (This means it could > stay around in extras forever) > > - If upstream says they are going to try and merge their module, but > never does (lack of time, technical issues, no real desire to, etc), > should the module be removed after some time? > > - Should there be any other criteria? (renew approval every new > release, only allow modules for 1 year and remove, etc) - Who fixes the inevitable bugs that get reported ? I'll state this publically now: If I get Fedora kernel bugs filed, and they have modules loaded that aren't shipped as part of the kernel rpm, I am _completely_ uninterested in dealing with those bugs unless they can be shown to be present without them loaded. This is regardless of whether they're 100% opensource or not, it comes down to time. I don't have time to deal with all the bugs we have *today*, and I for sure don't have time to go running around grabbing the sources for out of tree modules. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
