The linux-next and -stable trees

Posted Oct 30, 2013 13:07 UTC (Wed) by and (guest, #2883)
Parent article: The linux-next and -stable trees

Would anybody care to create a speculative list of these "certain distributors" and their possible motivations? I suppose that both are mainly of commercial nature...

Certain distributors

Posted Oct 30, 2013 13:12 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (2 responses)

Greg named a few. I think it has a lot more to do with available time and attention than any sort of overt competitive moves.

Certain distributors

Posted Oct 30, 2013 13:19 UTC (Wed) by and (guest, #2883) [Link] (1 responses)

> I think it has a lot more to do with available time and attention than any sort of overt competitive moves.

ah, okay. Still, not taking one's time to properly upstream a fix is usually motivated by commercial constraints; it's just not malicious ;)

Certain distributors

Posted Oct 31, 2013 15:41 UTC (Thu) by gregkh (subscriber, #8) [Link]

No, it's usually the non-commercial (i.e. no corporate backing) that are the worse offenders.

With the notable exception of Debian, they are wonderful, and push their stuff upstream to me very well, as does Fedora. Those two are the best, everyone else is bad, with some much worse than others.