[LEDE-DEV] [RFC PATCH] tools/squashfs: change to upstream and update to new version 5.0-rc1

[Phillip Lougher]

On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Alexander Couzens <lynxis at fe80.eu> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 18:03:26 +0200
> Alexander Couzens <lynxis at fe80.eu> wrote:
>
>> Hi Phillip,
>>
>> nice to hear you're still there!
>>
>> There was no offense meant in my patch, I just couldn't reach you
>> via email nor did anybody respond to patches for a year on the ml. So
>> my simple conlusion was there is an orphaned project with is
>> important for the community. Many distributions use squashfs for
>> their Installer or even as rootfs.
>>
>
> Hi Phillip,
>
> I'ven't heared from you in the last 3 weeks.
>
>> In the future how would you as the maintainer like to receive
>> contributions to simplify things on your side?
>> Do you still want to use the mailinglist at sourceforge?
>> What are your plans regarding the many out-of-tree patches from
>> different distributions?
>
> Any news on this?

I believed I have already adequately answered your questions in my
emails, and so a follow-up email to answer already answered questions
was unnecessary.  .

But to stop you making hay with a non-response, I'll cut and paste
what I said in my first email

"Many of those patch-sets are merged (where I have received merge
requests) into this repository.

https://github.com/plougher/squashfs-tools

Others I don't recognise which means they've never been submitted to
me. Distributions are entirely entitled to keep local patches which
they've never submitted to upstream.

Some others including portability patches have been rejected by me."

Why are you asking for more information, I think that quite adequately
explains my position.

As far as contributions are concerned, I wrote

"That GitHub repo is currently the most uptodate repository because
people have made pull requests on that repository.  It was initially
only created as a backup for the time that kernel.org was unavailable.

It is not the official repository, which is on kernel.org, but funnily
enough I can't merge GitHub requests to that automatically.  That has
to be done manually.

As everyone insists on using the GitHub repo it hasn't been on my
priority list."

I thought that was a quite explicit explanation of the current
situation.  Most merge requests these days seem to come through
GitHub,  It doesn't mean submitting a patch via the Sourceforge
mailing list is obsolete.  I thought I made it clear I can't be
dogmatic about this, and I will accept both, with no preference.

Phillip

>
> Best,
> lynxis
>
> --
> Alexander Couzens
>
> mail: lynxis at fe80.eu
> jabber: lynxis at fe80.eu
> mobile: +4915123277221
> gpg: 390D CF78 8BF9 AA50 4F8F  F1E2 C29E 9DA6 A0DF 8604