Current LTS and their EOL

Current LTS and their EOL

[Rodrigo Vivi]

Hi Greg, Ben, and all

Is https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html updated in terms of EOL?

Some news out of Linaro conference [2] generated a lot of doubts and questions
around.

Specially because on the way it was stated by the news 3.16 wouldn't be active
anymore. So I'm not sure about the news, but I'd like confirmation from you about
expected EOL.

[2] https://itsfoss.com/linux-lts-kernel-six-years/

Thanks in advance,
Rodrigo.

Re: Current LTS and their EOL

[Greg KH]

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 08:40:06AM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> Hi Greg, Ben, and all
> 
> Is https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html updated in terms of EOL?

As of right now, for the kernels I maintain, yes, it is correct.

> Some news out of Linaro conference [2] generated a lot of doubts and questions
> around.
> 
> Specially because on the way it was stated by the news 3.16 wouldn't be active
> anymore. So I'm not sure about the news, but I'd like confirmation from you about
> expected EOL.

Linaro has nothing to do with the 3.16 kernel, so why are you confusing
that with what was announced at that conference, which was about the 4.4
kernel tree?

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: Current LTS and their EOL

[Ben Hutchings]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1579 bytes --]

On Fri, 2018-08-17 at 23:48 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 08:40:06AM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > Hi Greg, Ben, and all
> > 
> > Is https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html updated in terms of EOL?
> 
> As of right now, for the kernels I maintain, yes, it is correct.
> 
> > Some news out of Linaro conference [2] generated a lot of doubts and questions
> > around.
> > 
> > Specially because on the way it was stated by the news 3.16 wouldn't be active
> > anymore. So I'm not sure about the news, but I'd like confirmation from you about
> > expected EOL.
> 
> Linaro has nothing to do with the 3.16 kernel, so why are you confusing
> that with what was announced at that conference, which was about the 4.4
> kernel tree?

The article says that other longterm branches are only supported for 2
years - which has been your usual practice, but obviously doesn't
reflect what all stable maintainers have done.

I try to ensure that every stable branch used in a Debian release is
maintained for the lifetime of that Debian release.  That means 5-6
years after the initial release of the kernel version.  So far that has
included 2.6.32 (maintained by Willy Tarreau), 3.2 and 3.16 (maintained
by me).

In the latest release we used Linux 4.9 which currently has a stated
EOL of 2019.  But I'm prepared to take on maintenance from that point
until June 2022.  Greg, is that OK with you and should the EOL be
updated on that basis?

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Who are all these weirdos? - David Bowie, on joining IRC



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: Current LTS and their EOL

[Greg KH]

On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 07:52:58PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-08-17 at 23:48 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 08:40:06AM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > > Hi Greg, Ben, and all
> > > 
> > > Is https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html updated in terms of EOL?
> > 
> > As of right now, for the kernels I maintain, yes, it is correct.
> > 
> > > Some news out of Linaro conference [2] generated a lot of doubts and questions
> > > around.
> > > 
> > > Specially because on the way it was stated by the news 3.16 wouldn't be active
> > > anymore. So I'm not sure about the news, but I'd like confirmation from you about
> > > expected EOL.
> > 
> > Linaro has nothing to do with the 3.16 kernel, so why are you confusing
> > that with what was announced at that conference, which was about the 4.4
> > kernel tree?
> 
> The article says that other longterm branches are only supported for 2
> years - which has been your usual practice, but obviously doesn't
> reflect what all stable maintainers have done.
> 
> I try to ensure that every stable branch used in a Debian release is
> maintained for the lifetime of that Debian release.  That means 5-6
> years after the initial release of the kernel version.  So far that has
> included 2.6.32 (maintained by Willy Tarreau), 3.2 and 3.16 (maintained
> by me).
> 
> In the latest release we used Linux 4.9 which currently has a stated
> EOL of 2019.  But I'm prepared to take on maintenance from that point
> until June 2022.  Greg, is that OK with you and should the EOL be
> updated on that basis?

Thanks a lot for the offer, but I can handle 4.9 until 2023 now, and
I've updated kernel.org with the new dates to reflect this.  I can
always use help though, if you want to make sure I don't miss any
patches that Debian specifically needs.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: Current LTS and their EOL

[Willy Tarreau]

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 08:24:45PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 07:52:58PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > In the latest release we used Linux 4.9 which currently has a stated
> > EOL of 2019.  But I'm prepared to take on maintenance from that point
> > until June 2022.  Greg, is that OK with you and should the EOL be
> > updated on that basis?
> 
> Thanks a lot for the offer, but I can handle 4.9 until 2023 now, and
> I've updated kernel.org with the new dates to reflect this.  I can
> always use help though, if you want to make sure I don't miss any
> patches that Debian specifically needs.

Excellent, thank you very much Greg!

Willy