Arjan van de Ven wrote:
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).
Well, if they clone and then edit without using separate branches for
their various edits, then ofcourse it'll be a nightmare to manage.
If, on the other hand, they're seriously interested in pawing off their
changes back upstream in a way that makes it easy for the kernel devs
to get them back, they'll have their changes on various topic-branches
and issue "please pull" requests to the various kernel subsys developers,
just like every other kernel hacker does.
Personally, I would absolutely love finding a git repository with the
fedora kernels so I can send patches without spending 4-5 days finding
out how the hell one gets the kernel to the exact state that the one
I'm running was built from. The process of finding a kernel source
tree matching my exact version was actually so tricky I gave it up.
Now I'm running a custom home-made kernel, so my (nvidia) graphics
card doesn't work without additional hand-hacking.
If those upstream sources are a tarbal, or a tagged commit... is a lot
less relevant.
Not for the casual developer with an itch to scratch. I had 6 full
days of work to spend on fixing the touchpad on my particular laptop
(see bugzilla.redhat.com #448656) so the system actually became usable
again, but since I couldn't duplicate the source-tree from the failing
fedora kernel, I had nothing to diff against, so no way in hell I could
send a patch.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@xxxxxx
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
