On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 20:10:51 -0400 > Presumably one could replicate this as needed. However, there is the > question of whether or not it's needed. Remember that the concept > using an upstream tarball as the canonical source version that we > represent to the world that we are using is nothing more than a > policy decision. Nothing in the GPL or anything else said we had to > do that, it was just what we *chose* to do (long, long ago, in a > galaxy far, far away). one thing to keep in mind... as comparison, what you don't want is what Ubuntu is doing with their kernel (clone Linus and then just edit the source tree); it's just one big nightmare (as you can imagine). Keeping upstream source and local patches separate is a clear winner (anyone who has worked on the alternative will agree with me). If those upstream sources are a tarbal, or a tagged commit... is a lot less relevant. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
