| 1 |
On Sunday 20 November 2005 23:45, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 2 |
> Our policy for X is that if upstream won't accept it, we won't either. |
| 3 |
It might work for you but it's not always possible. Sometimes there are |
| 4 |
upstreams that simply does not accept things, or accepts them on a long |
| 5 |
timeframe. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I used to patch xine-lib in big ways, and the patches gone in portage before |
| 8 |
being accepted by upstream, this was the only way I had to try fixing the |
| 9 |
"unreproduced" bugs. |
| 10 |
Sometimes you can't just sit still and wait for upstream to act.. While it's |
| 11 |
preferred that upstream accepts, there are things that needs to be fixed, no |
| 12 |
matter what. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Gentoo/FreeBSD is one of the examples. Many people won't think two times about |
| 15 |
fixing things for FreeBSD, don't ask me why, but it happens. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
And what happens when the upstream is dead? We're plenty of those examples, |
| 18 |
too. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Nah it can't be made a complete official policy, depends on the upstream |
| 21 |
depends on the package and depends on the patch that needs to be applied. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ |
| 25 |
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE |
Archives