On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 3:40 PM David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > From: Michal Kubecek <mkube...@suse.cz> > Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 23:13:07 +0200 > > > On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 01:33:46PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > >> This possibility had occurred to me too, which is why I mentioned the > >> project being sufficiently young that this can work out. It's not > >> actually in any LTS yet, which means at the worst, this will apply > >> temporarily for 5.6, > > > > It's not only about stable. The code has been backported e.g. into SLE15 > > SP2 and openSUSE Leap 15.2 kernels which which are deep in RC phase so > > that we would face the choice between backporting this huge patch in > > a maintenance update and keeping to stumble over it in most of future > > backports (for years). Neither is very appealing (to put it mildly). > > I have no idea how many other distributions would be affected or for how > > long but I doubt we are the only ones. > > And google and Facebook and twitter and Amazon and whatever else major > infrastructure provider decides to pull Wireguard into their tree. > > Jason, I bet you're pretty happy about the uptake of Wireguard but > that popularity and distribution has consequences. Small things have > huge ramifications for developers all over the place who now have to > keep up with your work and do backports of your fixes.
You're right, a fair point. Folks are indeed backporting this with their own processes. I'm maintaining a 5.4.y backport, but it'd be foolish to assume that's the only one. Jason
