On Mon, 1 Jul 2013 14:24:54 -0700 Greg KH <gre...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > but suppose people > > want BFQ? Why can't we have it in gentoo-sources. It is totally > > disabled by not selecting CONFIG_BFQ. Selecting it is no different > > than emerging pf-sources with the same other options ported over. > > Until you run into a patch that modifies code outside of it's CONFIG_ > option, like the aufs example I pointed out.
It would be policy to not add such patches, unless wrapped with config checks by a script; further more, I discussed USE=-experimental with mpagano and he found this separation a good idea, we can split this into a third experimental tarball to not surprise non-Gentoo users as well. mpagano as well as I stand completely behind that gentoo-sources must remain usable for production servers; which this USE flag fulfills, as well as separate from all of this to use live ebuilds in our testing to avoid surprises that even our non-experimental genpatches could bring. (For those in #gentoo-kernel, that conversation happened there) -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
