Ubuntu ARM and the linaro kernels

[John Rigby]

On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Christian Robottom Reis
<kiko at canonical.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 03:05:20AM -0200, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Nicolas Pitre
>> <nicolas.pitre at canonical.com> wrote:
>> >>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Oliver Grawert wrote:
>> > On Thu, 11 Nov 2010, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
>> >> That's understandable. Now the question is why John is maintaining and
>> >> packaging a tree that also incorporate the Ubuntu sauce on it?
>> >
>> > I think that the main reason is that this was much easier to have a
>> > packaged initial release by simply piggybacking on the existing Ubuntu
>> > infrastructure.  But John's tree and mine are still separate.
>>
>> Ok, so there's nothing that guarantees that John will continue using
>> the same Ubuntu infrastructure and sauce in the future.
>
> I want to put a firm statement in here that Linaro are committed to
> supporting Ubuntu on ARM through our kernel work, and that if it's
> necessary for us to support the kernel maintenance process then we will
> do it -- so there is a firm guarantee from me that we'll always be open
> to working out what outputs you need.
>
> I'd like to talk over the specific case of SAUCE patches, because I'm
> not entirely sure a) how much effort maintaining them is required and b)
> if we need to carry the Intel (and other arches) specific bits of SAUCE
> as well.
>
> I'm getting the curious feeling that the above isn't clear to the people
> on this thread, so hopefully this is a step towards clarity.
Kiko,

Thanks for the clarification.  You have answered my only question which was if
Linaro engineering was willing to support the inclusion of Ubuntu Sauce.

John