4 ms·
This 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 cha
by ktta 10y ago
This 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 come up with the new one. Github will be used for issues, not PRs.
- Jaepa 10y agoAre you sure about #3? I read it issues are not to be used but PR are.
- ktta 10y agoYou're right #3 is not right, but its not completely wrong either. Looks like issues on github won't be used, but PRs won't really be used since there isn't going to be any merging done using PRs. Maybe it'll be a bit more clear as to what they'll do. I wonder what's left for them to host on github if people can't open issues or merge their code. >- 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
- TwoNineFive 10y agoI follow OpenWRT/LEDE fairly closely and I agree that these bullet points are most likely the outcomes. Basically, in a sentence, LEDE may be allowed to take over management of the OpenWRT assets. It's not done yet though. I would not be surprised if six months from now they was still petty haggling going on.