Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932330AbWAVW5g (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:57:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932332AbWAVW5g (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:57:36 -0500 Received: from iabervon.org ([66.92.72.58]:62476 "EHLO iabervon.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932330AbWAVW5f (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:57:35 -0500 Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:59:36 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Barkalow To: Michael Loftis cc: Bernd Petrovitsch , Lee Revell , Sven-Haegar Koch , Matthew Frost , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, James Courtier-Dutton Subject: Re: Development tree, PLEASE? In-Reply-To: <4BC1BE8FDDB41AAA7205E258@dhcp-2-206.wgops.com> Message-ID: References: <20060121031958.98570.qmail@web81905.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1FA093EB58B02DE48E424157@dhcp-2-206.wgops.com> <1137829140.3241.141.camel@mindpipe> <1137881882.411.23.camel@mindpipe> <3B0BEE012630B9B11D1209E5@dhcp-2-206.wgops.com> <1137883638.411.38.camel@mindpipe> <1137883888.3291.53.camel@gimli.at.home> <4BC1BE8FDDB41AAA7205E258@dhcp-2-206.wgops.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1495 Lines: 30 On Sun, 22 Jan 2006, Michael Loftis wrote: > Yes, I realise all of this. But everyone seems to get this damned > territorial attitude that I want to see kernel development stopped, > quite the opposite. All I want to see is a stable target for certain > windows of time. So that way when bugs are fixed that are trivial > there's a place to go without upgrading scads of userland stuff or > worrying about lots of unrelated change. I believe that, if you want to maintain a 2.6.13.y (for example) tree after the -stable team has moved on, you'd be perfectly welcome, and could probably even do it on kernel.org. It might not even be that hard to get the necessary patches, given that -stable sees all of the long-standing stability/security bugs (so you can watch that list for ones you should include patches for), and the regressions will probably mostly be fixed before you get the series. I think that the reason that nobody's done this already isn't that it would be very difficult, but that distributions don't actually see a value in using old kernel series and are happy with -stable. If you have a reason to stick with a series longer, it might be worth the trouble to you. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* - 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/