anonym wrote (25 Nov 2013 19:26:58 GMT) :
> 21/11/13 13:50, intrigeri wrote:
>>> However, what do we expect here? In grand GNOME tradition, I can't
>>> imagine this is configurable right now. Worse, even if we write patches
>>> that make it so and send them upstream, I doubt we'll get it upstreamed
>>> within the next couple of *years*. From past experience, following a few
>>> feature-request *with patches* for years, these things move at glacial
>>> speed.
>>
>> I share similar experience, but I'd like to counterbalance it with
>> some good experience we've had recently: the seahorse-nautilus
>> patchset was promptly merged upstream, and IIRC it affected
>> 3 different components of GNOME, maintained by 2 different teams.
> I was talking about NetworkManager specifically.
Ah...
>> I agree we would have to be prepared to this. Note that we only
>> upgrade NM when we migrate Tails to a new version of Debian, so this
>> adds work every two years "only".
> And every time there's a security upgrade.
Right. Note that:
* the diff brought by security upgrade is most often tiny, and it
would be severe back luck that it conflicts with our own patch in
any way;
* the last DSA against NetworkManager was issued in 2009.
But well, I see, shit happens, Murphy strikes again, and I agree we
would have to be prepared to this, even if it does not happen often.
Cheers!
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
