[cgl_discussion] cgl patches

[Ibrahim Haddad (LMC)]

I agree with Andrew. A list like that would be very helpful.
It would nice if owners/maintainers would email their projects 
to build this list... From our side, here's the projects we're 
running.. 

AEM  (Asynchonous Event Mechanism)		
	http://sourceforge.net/projects/aem
	http://www.linux.ericsson.ca/aem/	
	
TIPC (Telecom IPC service)
	http://sourceforge.net/projects/tipc/

DSI  (Distributed Security Infrastructure)
	http://sourceforge.net/projects/disec/
	http://www.linux.ericsson.ca/dsi
	
Thanks,
Ibrahim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cress, Andrew R [mailto:andrew.r.cress at intel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 10:54 AM
> To: 'Dave Fuller'; Mika Kukkonen
> Cc: Ibrahim Haddad (LMC); cgl_discussion at osdl.org
> Subject: RE: [cgl_discussion] cgl patches
> 
> 
> I've also had a need for a web page with links to affiliated 
> CGL projects.
> Some of them I found by searching on sourceforge because 
> luckily I knew what
> it should be named, but some of them are on other oss sites.
> 
> Putting this together would seem to me to be one of the most important
> things to be done for CGL.
> Project tracking, feature content, fixes, etc., all depend 
> upon being able
> to see the linked oss web sites.  Where would the distros go 
> to find the
> possible feature content otherwise?  
> 
> I'd be glad to contribute some of the ones I've found, but 
> mostly the links
> should come from the project owner/maintainers, right?
> 
> Andy
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Fuller [mailto:dave at osdl.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 3:58 PM
> To: Mika Kukkonen
> Cc: Ibrahim Haddad (LMC); cgl_discussion at osdl.org
> Subject: RE: [cgl_discussion] cgl patches
> 
> 
> No ETA, but it is in plan.
> 
> On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 11:48, Mika Kukkonen wrote:
> > On ke, 2003-03-05 at 11:22, Ibrahim Haddad (LMC) wrote:
> > > Since no one is really trying to maintain the patches, I 
> assume that 
> > > a case where a patch from member company A can break a 
> patch coming 
> > > from member company B could exist? If so, how to prevent this?
> > 
> > When CGLE and even later the CGL-kernel patch was ramped down, one
> > rationale for that was that we were just duplicating the 
> work done by 
> > the distro companies. So the answer to the problem you are 
> raising is
> > simply that it is _not_ CGL-WG's headache, but instead it 
> is the distro
> > companies (or some other entity's who will be creating a 
> CGL compliant
> > Linux OS) headache to resolve patch conflicts.
> > 
> > I know several people think that this is not "optimal" 
> state of affairs,
> > but that just happens to be how it is, and I have no wish 
> to go through
> > again the pain and waste of effort we had with CGLE.
> > 
> > > Is there somewhere a list of all needed patches and 
> relative web sites
> > > where we can go get them?
> > 
> > A web page with list of CGL "affiliated" projects and links 
> to them is
> > planned for OSDL web site, but I have no ETA for that... Dave?
> > 
> > --MiKu
> -- 
> Dave Fuller <dave at osdl.org>
> OSDL
> _______________________________________________
> cgl_discussion mailing list
> cgl_discussion at lists.osdl.org
> http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/cgl_discussion
>