OpenWrt and LEDE to re-merge
31–37 of 37 posts
Re: OpenWrt and LEDE to re-merge
#32The forked from OpenWRT in May 2016 and are now already going back. I guess there's not much to gain from the code merge for end users except for a few bug fixes ( https://lede-project.org/faq#were_there_any_technical_reason... ).
https://github.com/lede-project/source/graphs/code-frequency
OpenWRT's repository had minor bug fixes in comparison.
Re: OpenWrt and LEDE to re-merge
#33This is awesome! So this is some of the important stuff: 1. Use the LEDE codebase, rather than OpenWrt's (undecided but likely). They'll first push any new changes in OpenWrt since the fork into LEDE, and then rebrand move completely to LEDE's codebase. 2.Will be using OpenWrt's name, not the name 'LEDE' anymore. 3. The workflow is still being discussed. The workflow of both LEDE and Openwrt will be learnt from to co…
Are you sure about #3? I read it issues are not to be used but PR are.
>- workflow between LEDE and OpenWrt? Using Github to gather pull requests, but not use the merge pull request feature of Github, have staging trees for queuing changes, and then merge into the main tree
Re: OpenWrt and LEDE to re-merge
#34,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,HERE ►WWW.bizcash3.COM
Re: OpenWrt and LEDE to re-merge
#35,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,HERE ►WWW.bizcash3.COM
Re: OpenWrt and LEDE to re-merge
#36,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,HERE ►WWW.bizcash3.COM
Re: OpenWrt and LEDE to re-merge
#37LEDE folks have started to dump their patches on kernel mailing lists, but they don't seem to be mainline-able as is and the submitter is loathe to rework them: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=148230680302480&w=2
The majority of OpenWRT/LEDE patches are gross hacks that need a major rework or a completely different approach. This is not the first patch of that kind.
Iirc openwrt refused to include a kernel patch to make hardware NAT work because it was too much of a hack.