On Monday 09 of September 2013 16:32:52 Johannes Obermayr wrote: > Do you guys actually read what I am writing and referring to or do you only > see a big SR and patch? > > Again the key fixes and improvements: First, that kind of mention in changelog would be a big step towards accepting it IMO, since reviewing a 4MB patch with almost only argumenting "builds faster!" is not easy, and one is much closer to decline such SR.
> - bnc#833714 (OSMesa symbols) ok > - bnc#807205,rh#917687 (issue with already applied patch) > - Readd lost things to the follow-up patch, possibly lost due to merge > conflicts - Drop obsolete patches which could mess up things ok, but i guess it would be good to test "does it mess up things" (also one of reasons why this is a bit hard to get in so late in the game. > - fdo#64810 (EGL runtime issue), could be also bnc#839074 Can't reproduce, and isn't bnc#839074 > - ~ 1/2 build time > - ~ 1/5 - 1/6 binaries and -debuginfo Always good ;-) > Is the only reason you don't want them fixed in 13.1 because they require 22 > patches and upstream core devs don't want to talk to me anymore. Maybe they > change their mind if one of the big distribution ships them ... Maybe, but i'm not fond of openSUSE being testing ground for random, huge, not-upstream-ed/-eable patches...
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
