Eric Leblond wrote: > I've tested and applied all my not applied ulogd2 patches other current > subversion tree. They apply cleanly. I've published a git tree which > contains this patches. > > Git tree: http://home.regit.org/~regit/git/ulogd2.git > Gitweb: http://home.regit.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=ulogd2.git;a=shortlog;h=ML > > The ML branch is the one containing all the patches. I'm not against the fact of having you all personal git trees with your developments. However, it make more sense to me to keep development trees if you have something that will take some time (for different reasons [1]) to get into mainline, like for example, Krisztian Kovacs's tproxy. For ulogd patches or, in general, patches for whatever that has been posted in the ML. I think it's a bit too much as we'll keep in sync as soon as I apply them, and that will happen once I remove a bit the load of work that I have on top of me :) Of course, this is my personal opinion. [1] features that requires several patch-rounds in order to discuss the best solution, features that implies intrusive changes, etc. -- "Los honestos son inadaptados sociales" -- Les Luthiers -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
