On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Ryan Hill <dirtye...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 23:11:44 -0800 > Alec Warner <anta...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > I do not find their stance wholly unreasonable. They offered to point > > users at an overlay, if someone was willing to maintain the patches > > there (in lieu of user_patches.) The end result is that if users apply > > the patches, they will get an unsupported setup. There is a fear as > > well, that the patches may damage cards (since the patches are not > > supported by the vendor.) > > We're talking about updating an include path here. Some files moved. I > don't > think that justifies breaking stable. > Exactly my point. This a simple "make-it-compile-without-any-new-stuff", not "add-this-cool-new-feature-to-the-package" patch. There are differences in them... Again, it's just me, and i don't complain if the maintainer doesn't wan't to accept the patch, i'm just expressing my opinion.
