Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757939AbYJVSNS (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 14:13:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752468AbYJVSNB (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 14:13:01 -0400 Received: from hp3.statik.tu-cottbus.de ([141.43.120.68]:53815 "EHLO hp3.statik.tu-cottbus.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752219AbYJVSNA (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 14:13:00 -0400 Message-ID: <48FF6CE5.2030101@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:11:49 +0200 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080702 SeaMonkey/1.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Howells CC: Greg KH , Alexandre Oliva , "H. Peter Anvin" , Alan Cox , Adrian Bunk , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change References: <20081016153053.GJ5834@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <20081016154726.GA6331@kroah.com> <20081016171626.GB22554@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20081017040239.GB28188@kroah.com> <20081017103138.1ca68d17@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <48F8C000.8030003@kernel.org> <20081017174226.GF2221@kroah.com> <48F98DE2.8030205@kernel.org> <48FCD421.2010208@bytemark.co.uk> <20081020202147.GA20788@kroah.com> <48FE32E2.5000601@bytemark.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <48FE32E2.5000601@bytemark.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2022 Lines: 44 Alex Howells wrote: > So with regards to supported kernels, the following springs to mind: > > * how long is kernel 2.6.xx supported? > * is kernel 2.6.xx one of the "longer term" supported ones? > * what are the requirements for a maintainer to push a > new release, a la 2.6.xx.yy? Is it based on time elapsed, > severity of any fixes included? > * how do we define "support" in this context? > does it mean security problems discovered/fixed *after* > development focus has moved on to new stuff is backported? > does it mean [critical] bug fixes? regression fixes? That's all quite simple to answer with a firm "depends". 1. Remember, it's all volunteer work (by companies and individuals). 2. Watch the release announcements and changelogs to learn about the lifetimes of -stable lines (they vary due to circumstances) and about what goes in into these lines. There are also some bits in Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt. Among else, it depends on volunteered manpower for patch verification and even on sheer coincidence (somebody needs to be aware that an issue is relevant to an active -stable line) whether a fix goes into -stable or not. Circumstances which lead to a -stable line remaining active for longer than usual typically boil down to the motives of an individual developer who picks up maintenance, like Adrian happened to do with 2.6.16.y and plans to repeat with 2.6.27.y, or like Greg kept/ keeps 2.6.25.y active alongside 2.6.26.y because it's directly useful to other work of his, AFAIU. If you are interested in more structured release policies, you shouldn't hesitate to have a look at vendor kernel lines. -- Stefan Richter -=====-==--- =-=- =-==- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ -- 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/