From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HhT8D-0002XL-Ab for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:17:13 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l3RGGSIM019887; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:16:28 GMT Received: from spunkymail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (sd-green-bigip-66.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.66]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l3RGEW1m017610 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:14:32 GMT Received: from [192.168.2.26] (c-67-180-39-52.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.39.52]) by spunkymail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB84187BD8 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:14:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <46322182.9090105@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:14:58 -0700 From: Alec Warner User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070411) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Linux 2.6.21 plans References: <46313C29.7050501@gentoo.org> <4631D179.2000609@gentoo.org> <46320FDE.1090401@gentoo.org> <46321198.1050804@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <46321198.1050804@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id l3RGGSKJ019887 X-Archives-Salt: 5182dd1a-50c1-4f2d-8a93-b3aa2a58efdf X-Archives-Hash: 4eb967e24365b4f1b03ebb9759afca81 Petteri R=C3=A4ty wrote: > Daniel Drake kirjoitti: >> Petteri R=C3=A4ty wrote: >>> Why would the kernel have to go stable before the usual month dictate= d >>> by policy? Yes there are usually security bugs but you did not mentio= n >>> that as a reason in your post. >> At last check this was a recommendation, not a policy, plus nobody >> objected timeframe-wise before. >=20 > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0040.html >=20 > "The package has spent a reasonable amount of time in ~arch first. > Thirty days is the usual figure, although this is clearly only a > guideline. For critical packages, a much longer duration is expected. > For small packages which have only minor changes between versions, a > shorter period is sometimes appropriate." >=20 > I would consider the kernel a critical package. Sure I could have worde= d > my original mail a little better. >=20 'is expected'. Portage is also a critical package and I doubt it's ever spent 30 days in ~arch. As always, maintainer knows best (and you can obviously blame dsd if all hell breaks loose :)) -Alec --=20 gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list