From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A8F21381F3 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 08:26:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 13A22E0C1C; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 08:26:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jacques.telenet-ops.be (jacques.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.50]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF617E09D7 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 08:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by jacques.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id AYSk1m01d2khLEN0JYSkw3; Fri, 09 Aug 2013 10:26:44 +0200 Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 10:23:01 +0200 From: Tom Wijsman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: peter@stuge.se Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Vanilla sources stabilization policy change Message-ID: <20130809102301.25aaf7f4@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <20130808234412.28286.qmail@stuge.se> References: <20130724190130.15592.qmail@stuge.se> <20130724191515.16758.qmail@stuge.se> <20130724230911.GA12710@kroah.com> <20130807113721.4a80eba2@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130807224434.GA7359@kroah.com> <20130807225032.31688.qmail@stuge.se> <20130807231943.GA8182@kroah.com> <20130808234412.28286.qmail@stuge.se> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/wVjprwMhCpBeJ8KI8pFciYI"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 46e87ce0-f620-4bcb-b3bb-85d47ce62f0d X-Archives-Hash: 5c28cc0a5d5f31b2384822ad5cb54b11 --Sig_/wVjprwMhCpBeJ8KI8pFciYI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 01:44:12 +0200 Peter Stuge wrote: > > > I think this supports the argument that the better kernel is > > > always the one with the most fixes. > >=20 > > That's what us kernel developers have been saying for 10+ years, > > nice to see it's finally getting some traction :) >=20 > It has been obvious for me for a very long time as well, but I am > just one person, and my idea doesn't seem to have much traction in > Gentoo. :\ When you state a contradiction [1], there is nothing convincing about it; the sentence as you made it there, can be interpreted in both ways. [1]: <20130809101023.6618a356@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> See the previous mail I just sent out. > > > 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. > >=20 > > 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. > >=20 > > But I fail to see how marking 5 patches out of 100 as "features" is > > really doing to do much for anyone, do you? >=20 > For stable kernel releases there would be no need. Depends on your own needs; but, identifying security fixes so they can be applied in a timely fashion as well as back ported and what not would definitely help. Why should the fact be hidden or slowly deduced that a commit is a security fix. Collaboration would really help... > I think they should be stabilized automatically in Gentoo. It's > simply a more accurate model of upstream. With 30 days delay, as well as bugs that block stabilization; there is nowhere in Gentoo an accurate model of upstream, if it were then it would be my mere luck. I don't see why the kernel should differ... At most, we do our best to keep up where we can; if not, there's always keywords like "~" and "" for people that want to be more bleeding edge. --=20 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 --Sig_/wVjprwMhCpBeJ8KI8pFciYI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSBKblAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9ANgIAIuu10KDUv91r9rV8Sx9RzJb PgxIL/Rm2F6FIE2sfzD9y8mgJiGr8CT9WxgCU423Vy8L0m78Ds/xO7l7jEmGwITA 6xdYLTSqgL3KQQqMYb+Jxec+sCo8aByKYKSBK9NWapmyCwsEdMhpLZthw+TH+Vz0 zrj8YqRnv61bPMexRyjoz1fBZNEGyYGl+Wbx5fVbXeCzUXPy3f5XngBFdhUfNvTQ 9gatVF0wq54ujYMOYIo2AOwj+Ealf3+sIK+unUSySfQK/jhcj6DbOlOvTrI5EA8j JUmUdKzfp1x33GfvWVbOnNlrhjxfXHLVDwgvY36/lSF70QRwcnfLsaRKayIkDPk= =tF/s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/wVjprwMhCpBeJ8KI8pFciYI--