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 D038D1381F3 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 01:42:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B64AEE09E2; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 01:42:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB9BCE09B8 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 01:42:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vb0-f54.google.com with SMTP id q16so66695vbe.27 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:42:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=aHNAFSmYnCj8bbuqvviaw9a6HUrZmDAsQYh6ho9PsZI=; b=JmAP4FbCT4IOiffbuk4sEy6e0RCRhfFXauLe9h8IUFhSOrKLaBAPySy9X0UY5PaM4H PZWZvqug4nn2PpBh5SbcY0I7U61TX+LC7yOUC1MjR+MKTiwvbt6b9INjYxxG7V3V7r28 EJHzuVqyw0lJeZmN32RJ+CHhG/1/dBXHz0alkP0lwl2ilf1YmJ79xEYBtKCwsbO6iYrj J3Atm/yAh2RXqrM1oLBhpmX+jkFyfY1JHFyqMqhgNRkbI1qumWjW/JwocQQGoq455sfi 9q2HZESzMc9Iq5NoIVA7/tcjOuKqu7r5fH1HaWgwNzBZlC9uL27iex5HUTImpeCBmpY1 cKtw== 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 X-Received: by 10.58.165.70 with SMTP id yw6mr16455040veb.19.1374716569831; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.73.74 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:42:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130724230911.GA12710@kroah.com> References: <1462872.zkzQFHQRNq@comanche> <20130724173751.8848.qmail@stuge.se> <51F0125D.2090500@yahoo.ca> <20130724175410.10332.qmail@stuge.se> <20130724190130.15592.qmail@stuge.se> <20130724191515.16758.qmail@stuge.se> <20130724230911.GA12710@kroah.com> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:42:49 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ecf0IuZmiqEtkHl7r5BdszVCqSA Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Vanilla sources stabilization policy change From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 4f6a142a-7fc5-4d99-9968-e8d0c1b3f76f X-Archives-Hash: 53d9a4f3f8294cf2caee4e73558ed5c0 On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 04:40:38PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: >> It just seems like we should be able to get by without a semiweekly >> kernel upgrade on our "stable" branch. > > You want me to slow down and do releases in larger chunks then? Hah, > not a chance... > To clarify - I wasn't criticizing your release schedule or making all those builds available in ~arch. I was only concerned with the idea of making all those hit stable. I think the kernel team (including yourself) have been doing a great job with the stable kernels in general. Just one other note - stable packages in general don't just benefit from arch testing. They also benefit from users running ~arch and reporting issues. Stable ebuilds are ones that have generally been used by many others for about a month already, so issues are likely to have been caught. I do agree with all that has been said about there being a tradeoff between new regressions and new fixes. Unless we run year-old kernels with tons of backports we're going to have that problem. We aren't RHEL. Rich