Re: -longterm kernels

[Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>]

On Sat, May 07, 2011 at 12:01:24PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, May 07, 2011 at 05:57:50PM +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> > On Sat, May 07, 2011 at 08:40:40AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > Nope, I'm not making such a rule, as you are trying to tell others what
> > > to do here.  And I'm not going to do that.
> > 
> > That was only a proposition, telling you what to do was not my intention.
> 
> Ah, but that's the main issue here.
> 
> It's a matter of people stepping up and doing things, not setting rules
> for what others are to maintain, right?

Right. I quite realize, that I should wrote "I like to maintain regular
longterm kernel releases, what you think?", but well ... my todo queue
is bigger and bigger instead of being smaller - I can not take such task
now, nor in the near future.

I just wanted to share idea about regular longterm releases. Having also
maintainers time in mind. Taking into account that in last time -longterm
kernels arise like mushrooms after the rain, I can imagine that soon
maintained -longterm versions would be i.e. 32,33,34,35,42,43,44,45.
Having 32,35,38,41,44 instead could save maintainers as well as
developers time.

Anyway, I didn't want to tell anyone what to do. Apologize that my posts
sounded that way.

> Back to one of your points, is Red Hat somehow not aware of the current
> stable/longterm situation and wishes to have things change here?  Last
> time I discussed this with the kernel maintainers there, they were fine
> with how things are working, has this now changed?

No, I only speak for myself here not Red Hat at all nor any other RH
employee, all I wrote in this thread were my opinions and ideas.

Thanks
Stanislaw