Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932169AbVLCXaF (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 18:30:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932168AbVLCXaF (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 18:30:05 -0500 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:60569 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751302AbVLCXaD (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 18:30:03 -0500 Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 15:28:37 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Adrian Bunk Cc: Jesper Juhl , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC: Starting a stable kernel series off the 2.6 kernel Message-ID: <20051203232836.GA1496@kroah.com> References: <20051203135608.GJ31395@stusta.de> <9a8748490512030629t16d0b9ebv279064245743e001@mail.gmail.com> <20051203201945.GA4182@kroah.com> <20051203225105.GO31395@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051203225105.GO31395@stusta.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1865 Lines: 45 On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 11:51:05PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 12:19:45PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 03:29:54PM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > > > > > Why can't this be done by distributors/vendors? > > > > It already is done by these people, look at the "enterprise" Linux > > distributions and their 5 years of maintance (or whatever the number > > is.) > > > > If people/customers want stability, they already have this option. > > I don't get the point where the advantage is when every distribution > creates it's own stable branches. They only do so because they are on different release cycles. > AFAIR one of the reasons for the current 2.6 development model was to > reduce the amount of feature patches distributions ship by offering an > ftp.kernel.org kernel that gets new features early. Sure, that's one of the reasons. But not the only one by far (I have a whole list somewhere, I'm sure it's in the archives...) > What's wrong with offering an unified branch with few regressions for > both users and distributions? It's not that every distribution will use > it, but as soon as one or two distributions are using it the amount of > extra work for maintaining the branch should become pretty low. "pretty low"? hahahahaha. As Arjan has said, the time and energy to do this for a long period of time is huge. If I were you, I would listen to the people who have and do maintain these kinds of kernels, it's not a simple job by any means. But by all means, if you want to try to do this, please do. I wish you good luck. thanks, greg k-h - 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/