On Friday 03 August 2007, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote: > Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > Mike Frysinger wrote: > >> my point though wasnt to knock ati (although it was fun), the point was > >> that i do not believe any closed source driver in our tree should ever > >> be grounds for preventing stabilization of a kernel ebuild > >> > >> so next time dsd (or whoever the ninja kernel maintainer happens to be > >> at the time) says "hey i plan on stabilizing Linux x.y.z" and someone > >> goes "wait, you cant until we get <closed source driver package foo> > >> working", the reply is of course "blow it out your arse^H^H^H^Htalk to > >> the package maintainer, this will not hold up stabilization efforts" > > > > If we're gonna go with this policy here, I'm also going to adopt it for > > X so we don't get stuck in limbo as happened fairly recently. > > If we're going to do this, we should just keep the unfree drivers in > testing.
i dont think that logically follows the previous argument -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
