On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 05:28:22PM +0200, Ralph Passgang wrote: > Zitat von Dirk Nehring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 09:20:09PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>Author: tha > >[...] > >> - converted four manual patches to the freewrt patch format > > > >Hi, > > Hi Dirk, > > >as we all know the FreeWRT patch style is technically better for > >updates, but loosing important information about the patch itself. We > >had the discussion earlier (for Asterisk), perhaps you look into the > >argument we changed there. Even if the documentation is not so much > >(like autocreate_none or multicall_binary), it has the advantage of > >grouping patches, and compatibility to other OS projects. Now all > >patches are tattered. > > I understand your point. Indeed there are some advantages as well as > some disadvantages with the freewrt patch format. > > If you are willing to change the madwifi patches to the classical > patch format that was used before my last commit, and if you are > willing & able to apply the security patches that are needed in > 0.9.2.1, then feel free to change that again. I can mail you the > security patch if you need them. > > If you are not willing to do this, then we will keep the patches as > they are in svn right now for the upcoming freewrt 1.0.4 release. > > Does this sound fair? :) > > So feel free to commit these changes in 1.0.
That's OK. Dirk _______________________________________________ freewrt-developers mailing list [email protected] https://www.freewrt.org/lists/listinfo/freewrt-developers
