First of all, it is not place to discuss CSSU ideals, IMO. Fortunately, for what I know, both busybox-power and cssu-thumb - mentioned here - are on their perfect way for inclusion into CSSU, despite attempts by "some vocal ones with almost no (if any) actual coding contribution (to CSSU) for the last 2 years". I'm glad, that it's time, when people more active in contributing to Maemo (outside IRC) during last years, start to decide more and more how CSSU should look like.
---

As for busybox itself, I don't necessary understand, why busybox-power upstream patches should be extracted and included into another incarnation of busybox project, in Your opinion. Busybox-power is *all* of upstream patches, so why to clone it? You just don't like anything with "power" in name, or what?

Last but not least, busybox-power is well tested (and nothing from standard Maemo "busybox-aware" scripts gets broken), both by developer, and by countless users - I would risk to say that more, than CSSU have or will ever have. No matter of the above, it's definitely better tested, that parts of CSSU have been (swapping return with kp_enter)

Kudos to IDont for all great work put into busybox-power - don't get distracted completely minor thumbs down, based on non-merit reasons. We all keep thumbs, both up and kept ( ) for busybox-power (and again set of thumbs-up for merlin1991, for, basically, deciding to include busybox-power in CSSU, sooner or later).

/Estel