Message-ID: <473E247F.2090101@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 02:15:11 +0300
From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
Organization: Telecom Service, JSC
User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.14pre (X11/20071018)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       torvalds@linux-foundation.org, stable@kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.23.3
References: <20071116183752.GA9807@kroah.com> <20071116184430.GE9807@kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <20071116184430.GE9807@kroah.com>
OpenPGP: id=4F9CF57E
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 895
Lines: 21

Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> We (the -stable team) are announcing the release of the 2.6.23.3 kernel.
> It contains a number of bugfixes for a number of architecture specific
> issues.
[.4, .5, .6 and .7 follows after .2 and .3]

I've seen the bunch of patches posted for review - split to several
series.  But - out of curiocity - what's the reason to roll each
series into each own stable release?  Can't all .2...7 be combined
into a single release (not counting .8 wich contains urgent security
fixes)?  (I mean, not with already rolled out stuff, but the original
reasoning for split-releasing them (as opposed to split-reviewing))

Thanks.

/mjt
-
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/