Re: Embedded Linux Flag Version

[Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com>]

On 11/10/2010 2:16 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:17, Tim Bird wrote:
>> On 11/09/2010 03:19 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 18:07, Tim Bird wrote:
>>>> It was noted at the summit that several CE companies and embedded
>>>> projects will be using (or are already using) 2.6.35 for upcoming
>>>> products or releases. This includes Sony, Google, Meego, and Linaro. On
>>>> behalf of the CE Linux Forum and a number of consumer electronics
>>>> companies, projects and community developers, we therefore declare
>>>> 2.6.35 as a flag version of the kernel for embedded use. Several
>>>> companies will be investing in development, integration and testing of
>>>> this version. Entities wanting to do business with those companies would
>>>> therefore be well-advised to make sure their hardware, drivers and
>>>> enhancements work well with this version of the kernel.
>>> wouldnt it make more sense to piggy back the extensive work going into
>>> the "stable" tree ?  many of the points you raise after all are the
>>> entire founding point of it.  plus, all the main distros form around
>>> that, are spending time working on that, is marked as supported for 2
>>> or 3 years, and there is already infrastructure/framework/process in
>>> place (stable@kernel.org).
>>>
>>> so instead of picking arbitrary versions (like 2.6.35) and needlessly
>>> replicating the huge work load, simply declare these stable trees as
>>> the "flag" versions.  that means today it'd be 2.6.32.y.
>> The fact that this tree is already a year old, and not likely to be
>> brought forward for at least another 2 years is the reason we didn't
>> choose it this time.  Most of the high-profile, active embedded projects
>> are already on 2.6.35.  For companies looking to adopt a new base kernel
>> in the next 12 months, I don't want to have them start with a year-old
>> kernel.  We did consider the utility of synchronizing with the enterprise
>> stable tree, but the timing just didn't work too well this time around.
> so you're suggesting this is a one-off choice.  in the future, the
> "flag" versions will simply piggy the existing stable trees ?
Yes, if the timing works then.
I can't promise anything, but I think it would be a very strong goal.
  -- Tim