| 1 |
On Sat, 2004-01-24 at 19:36, Brian Jackson wrote: |
| 2 |
> So one of my big goals for my time as kernel tlp manager is to come up with a |
| 3 |
> way to have more than one person responsible for each Gentoo kernel. It's |
| 4 |
> been to the point in the past where a Gentoo kernel wasn't actively |
| 5 |
> maintained. That shouldn't happen in a project this size. I've finally gotten |
| 6 |
> some more kernel devs coming on board, so now all I have to do is come up |
| 7 |
> with a way to allow them to do their jobs. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> The main problem is I can't come up with a way to handle this well. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> We can't really subject cvs.gentoo.org to the kind of abuse that 5 kernel |
| 12 |
> trees would introduce. Subversion isn't an option (and I'd assume that arch, |
| 13 |
> and others isn't either). |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> So, I come to you to help me brainstorm. Any good ideas, let me know. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
How much abuse do you think it would honestly be? Would it be worth |
| 18 |
setting up a kernel.gentoo.org cvs repository just for you guys? I tend |
| 19 |
to think that the kernels are a very important item for Gentoo, and |
| 20 |
something you probably hear the most complaining about when they fall |
| 21 |
even the slightest bit behind in version. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 25 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 26 |
Games Team |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Is your power animal a pengiun? |
Archives