[arch-dev-public] Kernel - vanilla vs patched?

[Aaron Griffin]

On Nov 12, 2007 1:42 PM, Alexander Baldeck <kth5 at archlinuxppc.org> wrote:
> I was never even near being worried about Tobias' decisions for
> kernel26. Most times when I actually touched the PKGBUILD was to get a
> rc-kernel up on my machine to try it out. Now that I have .24-rc2
> running here, I have to say that if it weren't for Tobias' work, I
> wouldn't have a working system to this day. Even though I don't know
> what he fixed as there are no PKGBUILDs provided yet, a vanilla version
> just plainly fucked my machine even before it even tried to detect my disks.

I agree. I didn't mean to imply (as someone else pointed out) that I
disliked the decisions that tpowa makes. I just wanted to point out
that the kernel is very important. It is super important, and if
people take issue with something, one person shouldn't be able to pull
a trump card like "it's my package, I'll do what I want". This is fine
with something stupid like gtkpod, but with the kernel, or glibc, or
one of those important packages, if something comes into question, we
need to address it.

As it stands, the patch that is the root of this was questioned by
James, Thomas, and myself. None of us liked it, but it was added in
anyway - ignoring the rest of us completely. It's unacceptable to act
like no one else knows what they're talking about.

> That's really too bad but I guess since for a while some of us are
> constantly moody about issues with communications. I feel that we really
> should have a piss up with all devs and tus rather sooner than later.

Erm? Random slang I don't get - what is a "piss up"? I have a feeling
it has to do with drinking, but it sounds like some sort of fist fight
to me.