-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mirko Vogt wrote: > Hey Alan, > > I don't think this is an good idea - not because of this particular > change but that kind changes in general. > > I'd like to keep our repository _as close as possible_ to the official > openwrt backfire branch upstream. > > Your patch is a cosmetic change - nothing critical, nothing which > changes actual functionality. > >>From my point of view - and yes, I'm not just willing, I _like_ to > discuss that - there's no need to diverge from upstream with that kind > of changes. > > So - still just from my point of view - there are two ways how to handle > these kind of changes: > > 1) Get it upstream, e.g. sending it to the openwrt-devel mailing list or > creating a ticket (http://dev.openwrt.org/) and mark it as feature > request > 2) Just do not commit that kind of changes > > Discussion is open :) > > Cheers > > mirko
Hi I don't see a problem with such patches going into openwrt-xburst first if and only if there is an effort to push the patch upstream. `git merge` should gracefully handle it if the patch was applied to both repos. And in case the patch gets lost at some point on its way to upstream it can later easily be found by doing a diff between upstream and openwrt-xburst. - - Lars -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAky0khkACgkQBX4mSR26RiMc7gCeOCID1vKvhIqlxr5IYvd90XXS CfQAnR9V5g/8YwvxhWrgXML3zI2ILH0n =QAhZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
