Re: [gentoo-dev] Vanilla sources stabilization policy change

[Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1428 bytes --]

On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 16:19:43 -0700
Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 12:50:32AM +0200, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > Greg KH wrote:
> > > See above for why it is not easy at all, and, why even if we do
> > > know some fixes are security ones, we would not tag them as such
> > > anyway.
> > 
> > I think this supports the argument that the better kernel is always
> > the one with the most fixes.

Define "better"; because 3.10.0 has also been worse than the last 3.9
release in some ways, despite it having more fixes than the last 3.9.

> > Rather than separating "bug fixes" from "security fixes" maybe it's
> > wiser to think about separating "fixes" from "features" - this may
> > be easier, but still not neccessarily easy.
> 
> For stable kernel releases, that type of thing should be quite easy
> for someone to do, if they want to do it, as the only type of
> "features" I take for them are new device ids.
>
> But I fail to see how marking 5 patches out of 100 as "features" is
> really doing to do much for anyone, do you?

Preferably this would be done for any release, a release like 3.10.0
doesn't have to be an exception; it does contain a lot more features.

-- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]