Re: [firstname.lastname@example.org: Re: NMU: kernel]
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 07:58:36PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > Again, i, as the pegasos upstream and the
> > > powerpc kernel maintainer, take the responsability for this, so i
> > > believe it is ok for inclusion in the debian powerpc kernel package. I
> > You abuse your position as powerpc kernel maintainer to get your
> > pet patches in without proper review.
> I wouldn't be as harsh as Christoph here but I do agree on the
> principle. I have a long experience of dealing diverging kernel trees
> and beleive me, that's not a path we want to go through. Even if we
> decide to keep per-arch kernel packages, we should at least do the
> maximum to have all patches in a single upstream source and keep local
> what is strictly necessary.
Well, remember i have been trying to send you those pegasos patches
since august last year or so.
> Anything else is a maintainance nightmare in the long term.
Sure, but it provides for localized testing before large scale
deployement later on.