| |||||||||||||
Maintaining a stable kernel on an unstable baseMaintaining a stable kernel on an unstable basePosted Sep 30, 2010 4:20 UTC (Thu) by marineam (subscriber, #28387)Parent article: Maintaining a stable kernel on an unstable base
"The fix, possibly the first major kernel release done in front of a crowd..."
Well, maybe the first in front of a large crowd at a conference (Greg would have to answer that one) but he has done it before. He cut 2.6.11.8 "Woozy Beaver" at an OSLUG (Oregon State) meeting: http://lwn.net/Articles/134164/
Go Beavs! :-)
(Log in to post comments)
Maintaining a stable kernel on an unstable base Posted Sep 30, 2010 22:40 UTC (Thu) by gregkh (subscriber, #8) [Link]
Yes, the first one I did in public was at the OSULUG meeting.
This was the second.
Any other user group want me to do a release at their meeting? :)
Maintaining a stable kernel on an unstable base Posted Oct 1, 2010 23:11 UTC (Fri) by jengelh (subscriber, #33263) [Link]
Well, stable... is just small. Linus doing a main release would draw even more attention.
Maintaining a stable kernel on an unstable base Posted Oct 4, 2010 7:34 UTC (Mon) by jcm (subscriber, #18262) [Link]
Greg-KH does *excellent* work with the stable tree.
One comment I would like to make is that the time between posting patches for review, and the time of release is very short. Often, it's "it's Friday, let me know by Sunday", which seems tough to guarantee many eyeballs have really had chance to see the emails. Perhaps it might make more sense to have it be 1 week for non-security emergencies? (a way could be worked out to handle the security sensitive bits).
Anyway, it's just a thought that keeps occurring to me when I do the podcasts (admittedly, often long after the deadline). If I were actually able to keep to one per week, it still wouldn't help people because there is typically only a three day window.
Jon.
|
|||||||||||||