Re: 2.6.19, kernel-package problems and what are our plans for etch ...

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 12:09:09PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > BTW, jonas, i notice also :
> > 
> >   http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=403203
> 
> Yes. I was slightly baffled about that bugreport fork, and is still
> wondering what to do about it: To me is seems like a report against the
> packager rather than the package itself...

Yeah, right.

> I want yaird to be a _generic_ tool for building initial ramdisks,
> without favoring the specific kernels maintained by the Debian kernel team.

The reality is that yaird has fallen aside during this whole year, because of
little activity on your part (and i must say that i stopped pushing yaird
after you explained to me why you should not take the 10 minutes to
investigate the RC bug report in erkelenz). Have you heard of yaird's upstream
since last year ? I remember you telling me that you didn't understand yaird
enough to do stuff yourself, and there was no sign of upstream. Has this
situation improved ? what are your plans regarding to this ? 

> I believe that maintaining yaird separately from debian-kernel helps
> avoid interest conflicts.

Well, this is where you are wrong, there is no conclict of interest. The
kernel-team++ should take responsability from building the official kernels,
but also from letting users build their own kernels, which integrate perfectly
with the whole kernel stuff.

It is you (and to a lesser degree Manoj), who, by not integrating the kernel
team, are making this separation, and that is not a good thing.

Friendly,

Sven Luther