On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 12:43 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:08:37AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 20:16 -0400, Warren Togami wrote: > > As I didn't have the time to follow all these discussions and threads, > > and to have a basis for such an IRC-conference, I would appreciate if > > Axel and Thorsten could write up a "my proposal at one glance" outline. > > I setup an executive summary of the comparison for you and for other > people external to the discussion until now who would like to join in > on Friday: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AxelThimm/kmdls/kmods_vs_kmdls_at_a_glance > > and the details remain under May I suggest comparing kmdls to thl's revised kmods? As it stands there are bugs with the kmod standard that should be addressed so I'd vote +1 for changing the standard. But I'm not understanding the problems with thl's revisions that you are seeing so I'd vote -1 for kmdls and +1 for the revised kmods. A comparison against the revised kmod proposal would help to clarify that portion. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
