There are 2 parts of our debian packaging distribution.
A) The original debian packaging
B) Our special sauce added on top of A) This is typically just --configure
options that we wanted a bit different( location of packages/log files/etc)
A) doesn't change that often, but does need to be changed occassionally.
Examples include:
1) Removing babeld caused a needed corresponding change in the
packaging code.
2) Adding pimd caused a needed corresponding change in the packaging
code.
3) Modifying vtysh.c causes some debian/patches to fail
B) doesn't change that often , but does need to be changed occassionally.
This happens less than A currently. This probably won't be upstreamed
unless it's a new feature that needs new packaging as part of the feature
commit into mainline quagga from Cumulus.
I would like the A) of the debian packaging to be part of the distribution
of quagga. As that 1/2/3 happens enough that I don't want to wait for the
debian packaging to fix their code. I'd rather just fix the problem and
immediately upstream the code into quagga. The turnaround time is bad
enough for quagga, I don't want to have to wait further for the debian
package maintainers to figure out the quagga changes and then react
accordingly.
A great example of this is the pimd changes. I had to add in the ability
for it to be included in our distribution. Unless the debian packaging
people have feedback how are they to know pimd was added? Do they have
feedback for this?
Having said all of that, your question about reaching out to the debian
package maintainers in regards to quagga isn't unreasonable and is a smart
idea, I'll start attempting to figure that end out.
donald
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Greg Troxel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Donald Sharp <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Yes I do.. We use it to distribute our compiled versions of our quagga
> > tree. There are not a whole lot of changes going on and I would not be
> > adverse to keeping them up to date in the quagga tree instead of
> internally
> > :).
>
> Have you coordinated with the people who maintain Debian-derived Linux
> distributitions? This is part of the problem (many people who want
> different things) that is the argument for not including it. I'd only
> support merging if it was the broad consensus of maintainers of
> public-facing Linux distributions that it be included, and if they
> agreed on the bits to be included.
>
>
_______________________________________________
Quagga-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
