Plan for tomorrows (20070726) FESCO meeting

[Parag N(पराग़)]

Hi,
On 7/26/07, Florian La Roche <laroche at redhat.com> wrote:
> >   Just FYI, kmod's got always low priority from FESCO. The usual
> > answer for kmods reviews are "why not kmod is added in upstream kernel
> > yet?"
> >   I struggled a lot to get first spca5xx kmod in Fedora but failed as
> > no one dare to review it. Then after it got considered as unsuccessful
> > attempt, I tried on submitting gspca kmod. After  much struggle I got
> > KMOD_APPROVED on gspca-kmod package review. But then no one dare to
> > review it even after I showed my willingness to maintain it for each
> > kernel release in rawhide and with such unfortunate happened things, I
> > decided to CLOSE my own package reviews for gspca kmod.
> >   I feel really bad for that. I am sure many peoples like to have some
> > of the under development kmods in Fedora. I often used to get request
> > from peoples about what happened to webcam kmods like gspca I tried to
> > add in Fedora.
> >   Today also I got query for available webcam drivers in Fedora and
> > RHEL, but unfortunately people now need to compromise on webcams for
> > available webcam kmods in kernel. There are few webcam kmods which
> > are, though under development but working well and their upstream is
> > prompt to release updates for newer kernels. These kmods supports most
> > of new webcams.
> >   But still we are not having those kmods approved in Fedora atleast.
>
>
> Is this in need to be reviewed by the board or more waiting for
> a package review? I'd love to see gspca upstream, but also
> a kmod rpm would be superb.
  Feel free to resubmit gspca kmod packages. I am no longer interested
to submit in Fedora.
I tried to submit gspca kmod which I really meant to submit gspcav2
kmod. later on upstream forked tarball to gspcav1. So if you want my
old packaged gspcav2 rpms, download if from
http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/Deffered/gspca/
These contains gspcav2 kmod.

>
> Also while kmods have many problems, I think we'll continue to see
> use cases for them, so getting through the pain of maintaining them
> does build up useful infrastructure.
>
> Last time I checked, building kmod rpms needed too many additional
> requirements, so I decided to stay at "make; make install" for each
> new kernel for my own machine.
>
regards,
Parag.