From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IGsWf-0003U6-DC for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 08:28:49 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l738RiK3023944; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 08:27:44 GMT Received: from pollux.sshunet.nl (pollux.sshunet.nl [145.97.192.42]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l738PiSa021579 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 08:25:44 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pollux.sshunet.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4285C580004 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:25:42 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at pollux.warande.net Received: from pollux.sshunet.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pollux.sshunet.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IK0kqIY8ZXJU for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:25:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [145.97.222.129] (129pc222.sshunet.nl [145.97.222.129]) by pollux.sshunet.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:25:42 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <46B2E623.6070209@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 10:24:03 +0200 From: "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070802) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] 2.6.22 stable plans References: <46AFC734.2000702@gentoo.org> <200708022005.27573.vapier@gentoo.org> <1186111093.32543.7.camel@wlt.obsidian-studios.com> <200708030014.41719.vapier@gentoo.org> <46B2B118.4060503@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <46B2B118.4060503@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: a917df7c-36c6-454b-8ddb-2551a7d71f0a X-Archives-Hash: 2d1091395efd9c4b0a8bed4208bbf546 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 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. Marijn -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list