Attention kernel module project packagers!

[Andreas Thienemann]

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Leszek Matok wrote:

> Isn't the "kmdls" system meant to be the cure to all of this? Is it even
> a hack? I don't even think the package names are truly ugly.
Yes, the kmdl system is a hack as well.
Having the kernel release in the rpm name is a hack.
There are people who would even argue, that such a hack should prvent kmdl 
from even being considered at all for fedora.

> People are going to make kernel module rpms anyhow. Forcing them to use
> flawed design that's hard to use, maintain, keep in sync with kernel
> updates and impossible to boot older kernels is worse than pushing Xorg
> 7.1 for FC5 which we're not doing because... we recognize the need for
> people to use off-tree kernel modules :)
This is pure and utter BS. The reason for not introducing xorg 7 in fc5 
was _not_ that people are using nvidia and ati kernel modules.

Please reread the "closure" thread.

> The Board has spoken - using external kernel modules is a valid user 
> choice and it's important to make it easier for the users. That's my 
> understanding of The Board's decision.
Please reread the board's decision as well.
Right now, there's quite a lot of discussion on FESCO about these kernel 
modules. Please read up on the zaptel discussion, it's definitly not clear 
cut.

> So, kmdls are the next step.
Sorry, wrong conclusion.


regards,
  andreas

-- 
"Being drunk beyond the thin line of good taste"
 	-- weEKAy on #ebone