# Love-Sources Future

## steel300

Now that lovechild has left, I'm left pondering the future of love-sources.  He had some very progressive ideas that I would like to honor. The time based release schedule is one of them. The question is, do we still base love-sources of mm-sources, or split and go our own way. I've been tinkering with both and can get both working. I would be more than grateful to hear which direction you guys see love-sources taking. Naturally, it's still a patchset for the people. I'm very easy going, and will include most of your recommendations. Please, let's hear your ideas.

----------

## IvoryTiger

 *steel300 wrote:*   

> Now that lovechild has left, I'm left pondering the future of love-sources.  He had some very progressive ideas that I would like to honor. The time based release schedule is one of them. The question is, do we still base love-sources of mm-sources, or split and go our own way. I've been tinkering with both and can get both working. I would be more than grateful to hear which direction you guys see love-sources taking. Naturally, it's still a patchset for the people. I'm very easy going, and will include most of your recommendations. Please, let's hear your ideas.

 

I'd prefer mm, as it's the more cutting edge of the sources and seems to have a lot of good stuff included that the mainline doesn't.

----------

## Cossins

I heard someone suggest that we rename them steel300-sources... With all due respect, I think they should stay love-sources in remembrance of Lovechild, who did quite a bit for the community (love-sources being one of them). And I don't want to discuss this.  :Wink: 

Also, the name is quite funny IMO.  :Smile: 

But anyways, I think love-sources should stay as much on the bleeding-to-death edge as they have always been. Love-sources is a playground for improvements to the Linux kernel - in a more thorough and extreme way than mm- is.

- Simon

----------

## motaboy

Yes, I like it!!! And like a feature request I'll hope yo can add the Marcel Holtmann Bluez patchset when it's ready, because in the main tree bluez is in a very old state. 

I think you can find them here but a 2.6 tree is not ready for now  :Sad: 

http://www.holtmann.org/linux/kernel/

Good JOB!!!

Bye!

----------

## floam

I don't think they need to remain love-sources. He isn't working on them, and he has left the community. steel300-sources sounds pretty dumb, and s3-sources would confuse people (S3 Inc.), so I don't know.

----------

## malloc

My humble and respectfull idea is that, unless you are planning on doing something totally uncompatible with mm, you should keep it as a base. I think you can and should build your ideas on top of them, and come up with continuously better sources has you've been doing for the past months.

Anyway just my 2 cents...

PS - I've said before but i'll say it as many times as i can, keep up the good job guys, you are doing one hell of a job.

----------

## Cossins

 *floam wrote:*   

> I don't think they need to remain love-sources. He isn't working on them, and he has left the community. steel300-sources sounds pretty dumb, and s3-sources would confuse people (S3 Inc.), so I dun't know.

 

No, but he did start them. Also, he was a very prominent member of the community who has now left. And the love-sources are very much in his spirit: Always on the bleeding edge, testing new patches and features. I think he deserves that recognition.

- Simon

----------

## taskara

I think love-sources is a great name - "I Love My Sources"..

also I think keep mm as a base, because unless you are gonna have entirely different patchsets, he is doing a lot of work for you, which is great.

the question is - why is mm leaving OUT the extra patches that love sources is putting in?

anyway good luck with it all, I can see you've won over lots of fans..

----------

## Cossins

 *taskara wrote:*   

> the question is - why is mm leaving OUT the extra patches that love sources is putting in?

 

I think that's because many of the patches that go into love-sources are extremely new and experimental. They will, in many cases, break the system. The mm-sources are more performance-improvement patches that will likely go into the main branch at some point in the future.

- Simon

----------

## taskara

 *Cossins wrote:*   

>  *taskara wrote:*   the question is - why is mm leaving OUT the extra patches that love sources is putting in? 
> 
> I think that's because many of the patches that go into love-sources are extremely new and experimental. They will, in many cases, break the system. The mm-sources are more performance-improvement patches that will likely go into the main branch at some point in the future.
> 
> - Simon

 

yep this is my point.. seems most people can't get the new lovesources to work  :Confused: 

----------

## merkaba

i don't think there's anything wrong with keeping the name as love-sources. if it were changed though i don't think it should be just to reflect the name of the current maintainer. i think i even saw a post once where lovechild mentioned being in favor of calling it desktop-sources or something similar.

mm-sources work for me. i'm definitely in favor of the more bleeding edge desktop/gaming performance type stuff.

i've seen some talk of love-sources.org. a website seems like a good idea to better centralize releases and for love-sources related communication. 

maybe maintain a better list of the various patches involved and links to where they came from (it really helps when trying to track down problems when things go wrong - we don't want to burden the wrong developers for things that could just be love-sources related.)

time-based releases sound good if they would help improve QC. right now you really have to roll up your sleeves to get some stuff working. i think the release naming policy could use a little work still too. the ebuild is currently love-sources-2.6.1-r1 when it should probably be something like love-sources-2.6.1_rc1-r1.

----------

## teilo

We should start a poll, but here are my thoughts:

The name: Leave it alone. We all know it. We all love it. Lovechild may have started it, but it has taken on a life of its own under the moniker love-sources. To change it would only cause confusion, obsfuscation, and turbidity.

Which base to use:

Much of this depends upon what Andrew decides to do going forward. For now it seems that mm-sources will be Andrew's personal beta for future 2.6 kernel releases. However, in the long run, much of what we see in mm now will be mainstreamed as it proves stable. At such a time, I can well imagine that Andrew will turn his attention to 2.7. Then we will have a big choice to make: keep lovesources on the stable branch, or the instable branch. As it stands, we have no idea what parts of lovesources will actually make it into the stable branch, if any, nor what parts will be included in 2.7 development. Given the fact that Andrew seems to include a great deal of fixes and helpful tweaks in mm, it only makes sense to make that our base for the time being. The patches we include in love-sources are often more cutting edge and radical than mm-sources. It would seem logical that mm serves as the happy medium between vanilla and love, making it a great base for us.

----------

## camresu

 *steel300 wrote:*   

> Now that lovechild has left, .

 

Slightly off topic ....

Where has lovechild gone too? Is he working on another distro ot left linux altogther.

Just wondering since I use other tools beside gentoo, What lovechild was up to?

----------

## stonent

 *floam wrote:*   

> I don't think they need to remain love-sources. He isn't working on them, and he has left the community. steel300-sources sounds pretty dumb, and s3-sources would confuse people (S3 Inc.), so I don't know.

 

My point behind it was he left and wanted all his posts deleted.  If that were to happen then there would be no record of love sources, so effectively they were open for ownership so I say Steel300 take them. Steel-Sources sounds good.

----------

## taskara

 *stonent wrote:*   

>  *floam wrote:*   I don't think they need to remain love-sources. He isn't working on them, and he has left the community. steel300-sources sounds pretty dumb, and s3-sources would confuse people (S3 Inc.), so I don't know. 
> 
> My point behind it was he left and wanted all his posts deleted.  If that were to happen then there would be no record of love sources, so effectively they were open for ownership so I say Steel300 take them. Steel-Sources sounds good.

 

true enough, although just because lovechild left doesn't mean the name needs to change.

also I think steel-sources would be misleading, in that it suggests a hardened kernel, perhaps with lots of security enhancements etc

where as love-sources are all the patches we love to have to make it sweet.

just a thought  :Smile: 

----------

## Gandalf_Grey_

I think that the sources should always be called love-sources no matter who the maintainer is. Otherwise as we go through different maintainers they will have a million different names and just confuse the hell out of everyone

----------

## floam

Do we really need to have an entire word? If steel would let us in on his name, it could just be his initials.

----------

## MrNugget

I think love-sources is a cool name for a patch-set, and it should be a way between stable and cool experimental features..

----------

## Cossins

 *camresu wrote:*   

>  *steel300 wrote:*   Now that lovechild has left, . 
> 
> Slightly off topic ....
> 
> Where has lovechild gone too? Is he working on another distro ot left linux altogther.
> ...

 

I think he only left the forums, due to the increasing number of morons inhere...  :Smile: 

 *floam wrote:*   

> Do we really need to have an entire word? If steel would let us in on his name, it could just be his initials.

 

I'm starting to think you have something personal against Lovechild.

- Simon

----------

## scoobydu

 *Gandalf_Grey_ wrote:*   

> I think that the sources should always be called love-sources no matter who the maintainer is. Otherwise as we go through different maintainers they will have a million different names and just confuse the hell out of everyone

 

Agreed.

Love sources sounds cool to me.

Spread the love   :Wink: 

----------

## Manco

Just rename it to lc-sources if it has to be renamed, otherwise love-sources is just fine

----------

## TPC

I think it should be based of mm for now.

But I also think that love-sources should move on to 2.7 when it gets here.

----------

## nepenthe

I'm in favor of love-sources as well.... I do think a poll is a good idea as well. Plus I know someone has registered love-sources.org

----------

## camresu

 *stonent wrote:*   

>  *floam wrote:*   I don't think they need to remain love-sources. He isn't working on them, and he has left the community. steel300-sources sounds pretty dumb, and s3-sources would confuse people (S3 Inc.), so I don't know. 
> 
> My point behind it was he left and wanted all his posts deleted.  If that were to happen then there would be no record of love sources, so effectively they were open for ownership so I say Steel300 take them. Steel-Sources sounds good.

 

Lovechild isn't the first user to leave gentoo .....

He actuallyhelped me out a bunch of times and I will miss his help and contributions !!!  :Question: 

Anyway I read the delete my post response and he would have to delete(edit) all his posts.

I mentioned that he could write a script to do this, but then the board could just repost them and turn his account off .... 

Anyway his contribution will be missed.  :Crying or Very sad: 

----------

## camresu

[quote="Cossins"] *camresu wrote:*   

>  *steel300 wrote:*   Now that lovechild has left, . 
> 
> I'm starting to think you have something personal against Lovechild.
> 
> - Simon

 

Not me, I am sorry if this was implied   :Evil or Very Mad: 

----------

## floam

 *Cossins wrote:*   

> I'm starting to think you have something personal against Lovechild.

 Not at all. I do however think that if Steel is going to invest this much time into something, he deserves credit. I've always not liked the name Love-Sources for a couple reasons: 

a) It will detract users ("Love sources? ehh...")

b) It doesn't follow the norm (Usually when a person creates a patchset, they use their initials. I don't think there is need to seperate ourselves any more with not only using a persons actual name, but using their online "alias".

----------

## neenee

i llike the name love-sources. it is what

attracted me to them in the first place.

----------

## Wedge_

I don't particularly care what the name is, it doesn't bother me at all.

To answer the original question, I'd like love-sources (or whatever  :Smile: ) based on the mm patchsets.

----------

## Cossins

 *floam wrote:*   

>  *Cossins wrote:*   I'm starting to think you have something personal against Lovechild. Not at all. I do however think that if Steel is going to invest this much time into something, he deserves credit. I've always not liked the name Love-Sources for a couple reasons: 
> 
> a) It will detract users ("Love sources? ehh...")
> 
> b) It doesn't follow the norm (Usually when a person creates a patchset, they use their initials. I don't think there is need to seperate ourselves any more with not only using a persons actual name, but using their online "alias".

 

Well, first of all love-sources is a Gentoo project. Secondly, just because it's the norm doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do. The patchsets named with initials are more confusing than anything else! (not that love-sources is better in this regard, which is why Lovechild himself suggested that they be named desktop-sources or something like that)

gentoo-sources, gaming-sources, pfeifer-sources, wolk-sources, etc. don't follow the "norm" either, and their names make just as little sense (except of course for gentoo- and gaming-).

- Simon

----------

## floam

 *Cossins wrote:*   

> gentoo-sources, gaming-sources, pfeifer-sources, wolk-sources, etc. don't follow the "norm" either, and their names make just as little sense

  Yes, that's right. And three of those are (or related to) Gentoo projects. Make it end! ;) I think a goal of love-sources should be to be used by more than just users of Gentoo and Portage. Posting "love-sources" on to lkml would most likely be pretty embarassing after you see what people think of it.

----------

## Cossins

 *floam wrote:*   

>  *Cossins wrote:*   gentoo-sources, gaming-sources, pfeifer-sources, wolk-sources, etc. don't follow the "norm" either, and their names make just as little sense  Yes, that's right. And three of those are Gentoo projects. Make it end!  I think a goal of love-sources should be to be used by more than just users of Gentoo and Portage. Posting "love-sources" on to lkml would most likely be pretty embarassing after you see what people think of it.

 

IMO, we shouldn't at all be naming kernels with just those 2 letters. The kernel is a far too important piece of a working system to have such an undescriptive name.

- Simon

----------

## floam

 *Cossins wrote:*   

> IMO, we shouldn't at all be naming kernels with just those 2 letters. The kernel is a far too important piece of a working system to have such an undescriptive name.

 While I agree here, I think it'd be quite grose if we looked onto lkml and started seeing "server-sources!", "Try our pimp-sources!", "nat-sources" and the like. These aren't products, they are patchset that should only be used by people who understand what they are doing and what it is. I think a problem of love-sources is that it has too many people using it who don't know what they are doing, and expecting something stable. Alot of patches seem to be just blindly applied and it's kind of scary.

----------

## Cossins

 *floam wrote:*   

>  *Cossins wrote:*   IMO, we shouldn't at all be naming kernels with just those 2 letters. The kernel is a far too important piece of a working system to have such an undescriptive name. While I agree here, I think it'd be quite grose if we looked onto lkml and started seeing "server-sources!", "Try our pimp-sources!", "nat-sources" and the like. These aren't products, they are patchset that should only be used by people who understand what they are doing and what it is. I think a problem of love-sources is that it has too many people using it who don't know what they are doing, and expecting something stable. Alot of patches seem to be just blindly applied and it's kind of scary.

 

...which is exactly why love-sources isn't in Portage and big, fat, heavy warnings are painted on your screen when you emerge them.

- Simon

----------

## sojourner

i think i speak for everyone when i say: "just call them porn-sources and be done with it"

----------

## floam

 *Cossins wrote:*   

> ...which is exactly why love-sources isn't in Portage and big, fat, heavy warnings are painted on your screen when you emerge them.
> 
> 

 You're probably right, but I like to argue. :)

----------

## Cossins

 *floam wrote:*   

>  *Cossins wrote:*   ...which is exactly why love-sources isn't in Portage and big, fat, heavy warnings are painted on your screen when you emerge them.
> 
>  You're probably right, but I like to argue. 

 

Me too.  :Very Happy: 

- Simon

----------

## GentooBox

 *Cossins wrote:*   

>  *floam wrote:*    *Cossins wrote:*   ...which is exactly why love-sources isn't in Portage and big, fat, heavy warnings are painted on your screen when you emerge them.
> 
>  You're probably right, but I like to argue.  
> 
> Me too. 
> ...

 

Well.. then i think thats clear..  :Very Happy: 

I think that Love-sources should still be love-sources.

its a fact that i never got love-sources to work 100%, but i really like to live the edge..  :Wink: 

----------

## nepenthe

 *GentooBox wrote:*   

>  *Cossins wrote:*    *floam wrote:*    *Cossins wrote:*   ...which is exactly why love-sources isn't in Portage and big, fat, heavy warnings are painted on your screen when you emerge them.
> 
>  You're probably right, but I like to argue.  
> 
> Me too. 
> ...

 

I think if you asked everyone this is what most and or close to all would say... as I agree =)

----------

## steel300

I think that we're all missing the point here. I'm keeping the name love-sources. That isn't up for debate. The question is, do we still base them off of Andrew's patchset. The general concensus is yes, but what about when 2.7 comes out? Linus is the maintainer of 2.7, so should we go a seperate way, or take his patches and build our own on top of that? I'm probably thinking too far into the future, let me get 2.6.1-rc1-love2 all finished, then we can talk about it more.

----------

## nepenthe

heh opps...   :Embarassed: 

----------

## teilo

 *steel300 wrote:*   

> I think that we're all missing the point here.

 

Thank you steel! My head was starting to hurt with all the name-wrangling.

----------

## Manco

 *steel300 wrote:*   

> I think that we're all missing the point here. I'm keeping the name love-sources. That isn't up for debate. The question is, do we still base them off of Andrew's patchset. The general concensus is yes, but what about when 2.7 comes out? Linus is the maintainer of 2.7, so should we go a seperate way, or take his patches and build our own on top of that? I'm probably thinking too far into the future, let me get 2.6.1-rc1-love2 all finished, then we can talk about it more.

 

He man, your really doing an excellent job, thank you for some real cool kernel-sources.

And I also think the love-sources should be based on the mm-sources, that way you can get as many patches in as possible.

----------

## Cossins

 *Manco wrote:*   

> And I also think the love-sources should be based on the mm-sources, that way you can get as many patches in as possible.

 

Well, I don't think the purpose of the love-sources is to have as many patches as possible, but I think (with the nature of love-sources in mind) that it would make more sense basing it on mm-sources, as they usually have quite a bit of improvements over vanilla.

- Simon

----------

## Redeeman

i think they should be called love-sources. as that was the start name. just think if they renamed linux to minisoft....

anyway, i will try boot my new love-sources now  :Very Happy: 

----------

## neenee

as long as mm-sources is a valuable alternative

to vanilla-sources, i would like to see it used as

base as well. or rather, i see no reason not to.

----------

## steel300

What about the the 2.7 branch? I'm guessing Andrew's not going to release a patchset for the 2.7 series. Should we move to 2.7, or stay with 2.6 and mm-sources? I vote for 2.7. Love-sources are bleeding edge, that's what makes them so great. 2.7 seems to be the only path, but if you can think of a good idea otherwise, I would love to hear it.

----------

## neenee

hm.. i'd say move to it only if it has something of use.

----------

## Manco

I second that

----------

## Cossins

Well, I think the early 2.7 releases will be very broken, as were some of the early 2.5's. In my opinion, love-sources should only move to 2.7 when it becomes fairly stable (as the 2.5's did for most people in the 2.5.60's).

- Simon

----------

## steel300

Those ideas make a lot of sense. I'll keep an eye on the 2.7 series and the lkml and see when things are looking good. Thanks for the advice.

Happy Compiling

----------

## eldiablo

I'll definitly move to 2.7 when it comes out. But i think that love-sources should stay at 2.6 stage for a while. Until the deepest changes for 2.7 is made.

 :Wink: 

----------

## steel300

I've got a different idea. Let's forget -mm. Robert M. Love (the real love) is developing a kernel for Ximian/SUSE. I read about it before, and it seems like he's going through with it. Lovechild pointed this fact out to me earlier. RML might have a better idea on making a more highly tuned desktop kernel. What do you think about basing -love off of -rml instead of -mm?

----------

## TPC

I say we take from mm and apply the things that isn't in 2.7 and applies fine with 2.7 and applies those, and then we check what patches there are in -rml, and applies those that we want along with a few more like reiser4.

----------

## eldiablo

 *steel300 wrote:*   

> I read about it before, and it seems like he's going through with it. Lovechild pointed this fact out to me earlier. RML might have a better idea on making a more highly tuned desktop kernel. What do you think about basing -love off of -rml instead of -mm?

 

Yeah, if -rml proves to be as good, and as bleeding edge at -mm, then i think you should test it. 

Is there any info, or webspace where we can download/read about the -rml?

----------

## IvoryTiger

Also might want to look at some of the stuf mjb puts into his set...

From lkml digest

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> >> The patchset contains ... oh hell, anything I feel like putting in it.
> 
> >> It's meant to be pretty stable - performance should be better than mainline,
> ...

 

----------

## neonik

In my opinion, the name should stay as it is to the present, because it would cause some kind of misunderstanding which isn't what you'd want, I assume.

As for the base sources for the patchset I'd prefer it to be mm-sources based, simply due to the fact mm-sources is my favorite kernel flavor. I don't like vanilla because it doesn't provide some of the features there are in other source codes, don't like the other source codes due to the lack of some additional features mm-sources provide, that's why I'd like to see love-sources stay based on mm-sources. Purely consumer side of view: "If your sources are worse, why should I use them?" could take place. This is also one of the reasons I believe you should stay based on the Andrew Morton's patchset - it's one of the best patchsets out there + love sources is some kind of an extension to it, right? Think about it.

And the idea of adding a poll to this thread is great, you'd also see clear results.  :Smile: 

Good luck in whatever direction of development you decide to go further, though  :Smile: 

----------

## Evil Dark Archon

my vote is to base love-sources on whichever patchset performs the best, both objective and subjective performance should be taken into account.

----------

## steel300

I'll take a look at the -mjb kernel, it doesn't seem to be to bad. -rml is my main choice right now. But, there's nowhere that says that it must be based off of one person's patchset. Regarding the poll, I was looking more for an intelligent debate that wouldn't suit a poll. So far, I've gotten two pages of bickering about the name, and one page of ideas that have no backing. If anyone would care to support there ideas with logical reasons I'm all ears. I don't mean to be offensive to anyone, but I was just thrown off that the name could be such an issue.

----------

## relyt

I think it depends on what the main focus of 'love' is.  Is this to be a mega patch of experimental features; or will it concentrate on increased desktop interactivity?

(side note: There may be some problems that come up from people testing stuff like Reiser4 on a kernel that is also chock full of other experimental stuff.)

It's more work, but I reccomend keeping an eye on mm, rml, mjb - and just pulling the patches from them as needed individually.

----------

## PrakashP

I personally think it would be *easier* for you to base love sources on anotherone's flavour. Otherwise you would have to fiddel in a few dozen of patches. But if you have time, you could try to make an independant set of patches. I also think that mm is not a must, but vanilla is too boring.  :Wink:  So either love should be based on a decent patch-set fulfilling our needs of cutting-edge kernel while delivering some sort of stability or *you* mailny (it would otherwise take too much time to let the community decode which fixes/patches to put in) decide which patches fulfill this task. Then the community maybe should have a role in deciding which patches should get into the role as "traditional" love patches, like bootsplash, nicks scheduler (which unfortunately isn't in; maybe ask Nick to make a recent diff), reiserfs4.

Just my 2 cents.

----------

