| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Tiziano Müller wrote: |
| 5 |
| Hi everyone |
| 6 |
| |
| 7 |
| What do you think of creating a new 'virtualization' project or herd/team? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Sounds like a good idea, there seem to be enough packages to warrant it. |
| 10 |
~ Especially if you're finding shared packages and space for integration |
| 11 |
of components. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
| So, what do you think? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
As one of the primary vmware devs, I'm not sure that vmware easily fits |
| 16 |
into this group based on it's closed-source nature, and the complex (but |
| 17 |
just about workable) module system we've put in place. I also wouldn't |
| 18 |
want to muddy the virtualization email address with all the random |
| 19 |
vmware module bugs... 5:) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I'm pretty happy for the vmware group to go under the virtualization |
| 22 |
herd, but I'd very much like to maintain the vmware email |
| 23 |
alias/assignment for bugs, and I'm not sure how much we'd be able to |
| 24 |
integrate with the larger group. Do you think it's worthwhile vmware |
| 25 |
joining the umbrella or should we just stay separate? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Mike 5:) |
| 28 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 29 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkglrH8ACgkQu7rWomwgFXo4EgCfRl05jk1I3jbfIXFdNtnaRRFB |
| 32 |
Up4AoKPc4t2OsIjI/4E+DCy2mRp4x8+b |
| 33 |
=uOzA |
| 34 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives