Re: Maintenance policies and early considerations IV


Daniel Sangorrin <daniel.sangorrin@...>
 

Hi Koguchi-san,

I think you are right. It's my fault, sorry.

Daniel

-----Original Message-----
From: cip-dev-bounces@lists.cip-project.org [mailto:cip-dev-bounces@lists.cip-project.org] On Behalf Of 小口琢夫 / KOGUCHI,
TAKUO
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 4:35 PM
To: 'Agustin Benito Bethencourt'; cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org
Subject: Re: [cip-dev] Maintenance policies and early considerations IV

Hi Agustin,
Let me understand what you wrote.
CIP should avoid making any such promise because:

* Upstream fixes frequently change the kernel module API and/or ABI and
backporting them in a way that does not is difficult and risky - CIP
users set their own kernel configurations, so there will not be a
single kernel ABI for IHVs to target anyway
Correction:

Upstream fixes frequently change the kernel module API and/or ABI and
backporting them in a way that is difficult and risky - CIP users set
their own kernel configurations, so there will not be a single kernel ABI for IHVs to
target anyway
Is the correction correct?
I thought you wrote;
* Upstream fixes frequently change the kernel module API and/or ABI and
backporting them in a way that does not (change the kernel module API and/or ABI )is difficult and risky - CIP
Am I wrong?

Takuo Koguchi



_______________________________________________
cip-dev mailing list
cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org
https://lists.cip-project.org/mailman/listinfo/cip-dev

Join cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org to automatically receive all group messages.