On 2 October 2017 at 03:26, Dennis Gilmore <den...@ausil.us> wrote: > El vie, 22-09-2017 a las 15:25 -0500, Michael Catanzaro escribió: > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Chris Adams <li...@cmadams.net> > > wrote: > > > On what grounds? There is nothing in the Fedora guidelines that > > > makes > > > package maintainers beholden to third-party (by definition, not > > > part > > > of > > > Fedora) repos. There's nothing for FESCo to vote on, unless you > > > are > > > going to propose that change. > > > > OK, I'll bite. The grounds are that FESCo has granted the WG full > > control over the Workstation product, and the kernel package is part > > of > > that product. Although I can't speak for the entire WG today, I > > would > > be fairly astounded if the WG were to choose to allow kernel updates > > to > > break Negativo users after having identified Negativo as a strategic > > priority and advertised it as supported. So if a kernel update goes > > out > > that breaks Negativo users, I would expect a policy to delay future > > kernel upgrades until Negativo has been tested and confirmed to be > > working. Since that would be controversial, someone would surely > > appeal > > to FESCo. Probably easier for everyone to take it straight to FESCo, > > right? > > > > But again, if there is already a technical solution (a fallback to > > noveau) in place and working, as I suspect (would be really nice if > > somebody could confirm that!) then it doesn't matter. > > > > Michael > > Just catching up on email, There is no such thing as a WG post GA, we > ship and support a single stream of updates for all products, editions > and spins. The only way that the WG could stop or control any update > for a package not owned by the WG is to provide enough negative karma > to an update in Bodhi to force it to not be ppushable. I would really > hope that people would not do that to keep updates out, and would > instead have a open honest discussion to try figure out a acceptable > path forward. Any change to how we do updates would require > significant changes in many parts of how we manage the ditro and update > process. It would need discussions with Release Engineering and > Infrastructre, that came with resources to support the work. > > > Dennis > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org >
Just to round off this thread since LWN linked to it a day or so ago ... Installed 4.13.4-200.fc26.x86_64 from updates repo just now and and bumblebee-nvidia-384.90-1.fc26.x86_64 compiled the driver fine.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
