On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Marco and I had an interesting discussion about bug-grub today: > > 15:54 < marco_g> nyu: Actually, I rarely look at the BTS > 15:54 < marco_g> The list is a better way to process patches, IMO. > 15:55 < nyu> marco_g: bug-grub is rotting > 15:55 < nyu> we should really consider a list merge > 15:55 < marco_g> nyu: What do you mean? > 15:55 < nyu> either that, or get rid of the BTS and bug-grub > 15:55 < marco_g> nyu: I do not oppose to the latter ;-) > 15:55 < nyu> marco_g: a BTS *is* useful > 15:56 < marco_g> nyu: I do not see any email when people post bugs for GRUB > 2, is there a way to subscribe? > 15:56 < marco_g> That would make it more useful to me... > 15:57 < nyu> marco_g: they go to bug-grub > 15:57 < marco_g> Oh, I don't read bug-grub > 15:57 < marco_g> It's for GRUB Legacy as I see it. > 15:59 < nyu> marco_g: then let's dislodge GRUB Legacy from it > 16:00 < marco_g> nyu: Good idea, please propose it ;-) > > So this is my lazy way of I'm proposing that :-) > > What does everyone think? > > -- > Robert Millan
Hello! Why I am inclined to think is that the Bug-Grub list should be allowed to continue for as long as there are available binary blobs and source code ones for the original Grub-Legacy. Currently that one is in a finally released state, as Grub2 hastens towards its first actual release. An appropriate disclaimer of what list does what should be posted onto the basic website. ----- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] "This signature was once found posting rude messages in English in the Moscow subway." _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
