Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261336AbVCCCGF (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2005 21:06:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261352AbVCCCGC (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2005 21:06:02 -0500 Received: from note.orchestra.cse.unsw.EDU.AU ([129.94.242.24]:48849 "EHLO note.orchestra.cse.unsw.EDU.AU") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261336AbVCCB73 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2005 20:59:29 -0500 From: Neil Brown To: Andrew Morton Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 12:59:20 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16934.28536.137910.735002@cse.unsw.edu.au> Cc: Dave Jones , davem@davemloft.net, jgarzik@pobox.com, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering In-Reply-To: message from Andrew Morton on Wednesday March 2 References: <42264F6C.8030508@pobox.com> <20050302162312.06e22e70.akpm@osdl.org> <42265A6F.8030609@pobox.com> <20050302165830.0a74b85c.davem@davemloft.net> <20050303011151.GJ10124@redhat.com> <20050302172049.72a0037f.akpm@osdl.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.3.1 X-face: [Gw_3E*Gng}4rRrKRYotwlE?.2|**#s9D Dave Jones wrote: > > > > So what was broken with the 2.6.8.1 type of 'hotfix kernel' release ? > > That's an alternative, of course. > > But that _is_ a branch, and does need active forward- and (mainly) > backward-porting work. > > There's nothing wrong with it per-se, but it becomes a "stabilised version > of the kernel.org tree" or even a "production version of the kernel.org > tree". In other words it's somewhere on the line between the mainline > kernel.org tree and a distribution. How far along that line should it > be positioned? I think there is a case for the "community" providing the most "stable" kernel that it (reasonably) can without depending on "distributions" to do that. One reason is that (some) distributions are known to have released kernels with quite broken and unreviewed patches, or with new functionality that never ends up appearing in main-line for whatever reason. Further, it would surely be useful for all distributions to have one central place that 'stablising' patches appear so they can pick-and-choose from them rather than each keeping their own independent set. For the kernel, I am the "distribution" for my employer and I choose which kernel to use, with which patches. I really don't want to hunt around for all those stablisation patches, or sift through the patches in 2.6.X+1-pre to find things to apply to 2.6.X. I would be really happy there was a central place where maintainers can put suitably reviewed "important bug fix"es for recent releases, and from where kernel maintainers for any distribution (official or not) could pull them. Having said that, I am not in a position to offer my services to maintain such a really-stable kernel branch, so I'll just cope with whatever is provided. NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/