On 05/05/2016 10:03 PM, Bert Vermeulen wrote:
> On 05/05/2016 04:09 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
>> I think we should encourage everyone to upstream the patches, I think in
>> one of the statics I saw that OpenWrt ranked 3. or 4. in contribution to
>> the kernel among the Linux distributions before Ca
On 05/05/2016 04:09 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
I think we should encourage everyone to upstream the patches, I think in
one of the statics I saw that OpenWrt ranked 3. or 4. in contribution to
the kernel among the Linux distributions before Canonical. ;-)
Encourage is just a word. Nobody in Open
On 05/04/2016 11:49 PM, Vittorio G (VittGam) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 04/05/2016 22:30:40 CEST, Bert Vermeulen wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Very happy to see this project reboot happening. An acknowledgement of
>> the issues facing OpenWRT was long overdue. I'd like some clarity on
>> some things that aren'
On Wed, 4 May 2016, Vittorio G (VittGam) wrote:
Hi,
On 04/05/2016 22:30:40 CEST, Bert Vermeulen wrote:
Hi all,
Very happy to see this project reboot happening. An acknowledgement of the
issues facing OpenWRT was long overdue. I'd like some clarity on some
things that aren't explicitly menti
Hi,
On 04/05/2016 22:30:40 CEST, Bert Vermeulen wrote:
Hi all,
Very happy to see this project reboot happening. An acknowledgement of the
issues facing OpenWRT was long overdue. I'd like some clarity on some things
that aren't explicitly mentioned in the stated goals, however.
First off, is
Hi all,
Very happy to see this project reboot happening. An acknowledgement of the
issues facing OpenWRT was long overdue. I'd like some clarity on some things
that aren't explicitly mentioned in the stated goals, however.
First off, is the SVN nonsense definitely gone now? Will the LEDE proj
