Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750877AbWAaPF1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:05:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750881AbWAaPF1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:05:27 -0500 Received: from khc.piap.pl ([195.187.100.11]:9486 "EHLO khc.piap.pl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750877AbWAaPF1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:05:27 -0500 To: Chuck Wolber Cc: "Randy.Dunlap" , gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org, jmforbes@linuxtx.org, zwane@arm.linux.org.uk, tytso@mit.edu, davej@redhat.com, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: Re: [patch 0/6] 2.6.14.7 -stable review References: <20060128021749.GA10362@kroah.com> <20060128204531.4786aaea.rdunlap@xenotime.net> From: Krzysztof Halasa Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:05:22 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Chuck Wolber's message of "Sat, 28 Jan 2006 21:02:16 -0800 (PST)") Message-ID: 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: 751 Lines: 20 Chuck Wolber writes: > I don't know if there is a problem, but it goes against the concept of > "one-off" fixes that aren't maintained If they have time for this then great, I can't see any drawbacks. The early concept was just meant to limit the workload. > (aka the purpose of the -stable > team). This slope eventually leads us to backporting -stable fixes from > other -stable releases etc etc. As long as they can contribute their time it's a win. -- Krzysztof Halasa - 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/