Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932078AbVLCViV (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 16:38:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751297AbVLCViV (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 16:38:21 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:58510 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751284AbVLCViU (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 16:38:20 -0500 Subject: Re: RFC: Starting a stable kernel series off the 2.6 kernel From: Arjan van de Ven To: "M." Cc: Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <20051203135608.GJ31395@stusta.de> <9a8748490512030629t16d0b9ebv279064245743e001@mail.gmail.com> <20051203201945.GA4182@kroah.com> <20051203211209.GA4937@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 22:38:15 +0100 Message-Id: <1133645895.22170.33.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.0.4 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (1.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address [213.93.14.173 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 1.7 RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL RBL: NJABL: dialup sender did non-local SMTP [213.93.14.173 listed in combined.njabl.org] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1637 Lines: 41 > > > makes sense, but are you sure having distros like Debian, enterprise > products from redhat etc using the same 6months release for their > stable versions does not translate in minor fragmentation on kernel > development I'm quite sure that there isn't significant fragmentation; all those distros in their maintenance generally only take patches that are already upstream (or they send them upstream during the maintenance) just to make sure that their long term costs don't go insane (eg for the $nextversion, the distros can just start clean because they know all bugfixes from maintenance versions are already in the new kernel.org kernel they get; not doing that is REALLY expensive so distros like to avoid that) > and in benefits for every user? you can't have it both ways; you can't be "new" and "old stable" at the same time. > . Another > advantage would be to benefit external projects and hardware producers > writing open drivers, enlowering the effort in writing and mantaining > a driver. there is an even better model for those: Get it merged into kernel.org! There is an even bigger deal here: even if you're not ready to get merged yet, staying on the same old version for 6 months is NOT going to help you. In fact it's worse: it is 10x easier to deal with 6 small steps of 1 month than to deal with 1 big step of 6 months. - 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/