Re: [patch] kfreebsd-i386 kernel udeb

[Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>]

On Tuesday 23 June 2009, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> I think we could merge the code in trunk also to make the kfreebsd
> branch as small as possible and reduce the work for maintainence POV
> from their developers (Aurien and Luca ATM). Doing it with a know
> possible improvement is non-sense IMO.

That is not at all what I was talking about!

I now see that I probably misunderstood but that's really your own fault. 
Please look at your mail again:
   On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
   > Good work; IMO the best way of doing it is to moving it to
   > kernel-wedge to make the work for other arches easier in future and
   > avoid duplication.

   The only thing that could be done in kernel-wedge is the ntfs one that
   you could fix it now and use it in the package.

   There's no reason to let it to later since it will make your life
   easier.

There is *absolutely nothing* there that should have made me understand 
the last sentence is about merging the patch into trunk!
And all 3 sentences are about the worst English I've ever seen from you. 
Your English is much better than this.

I understood that as a demand to move the specification of the ntfs 
modules to kernel-wedge. That *is* mostly useless and for no gain.

"moving it to kernel-wedge" is a completely wrong description 
for "committing this patch to trunk":
- the patch introduces no changes in kernel-wedge at all
- there is no "move" to k-w as there was not some other method that
  was used before
- the packages/kernel directory does not only contain k-w so again
  nothing is "moved" to k-w; at best it is moved to packages/kernel

If you had said something like "move the new udeb to trunk" or "commit 
this patch to trunk", then it would have been clear what you were talking 
about and I would not have replied, simply because I agree with that.

So, I apologize for my sarcastic comments because what I was replied to 
was not what you meant, but *please* spend a bit more time on your mails 
before you send them so that such misunderstandings can be avoided.

Cheers,
FJP