From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 08:47:06 -0500 From: Greg KH To: Willy Tarreau Cc: tim.gardner@canonical.com, stable@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Hutchings Subject: Re: Latest kernel stable/longterm status Message-ID: <20120121134706.GA21515@kroah.com> References: <20120110003705.GA9482@kroah.com> <20120110022617.GA11376@home.goodmis.org> <4F0C0CF5.1080706@gmail.com> <20120110235612.GB1507@kroah.com> <4F0D6006.40506@canonical.com> <20120111151218.GB24077@kroah.com> <4F0DF2F3.8080902@canonical.com> <20120111205212.GA18902@kroah.com> <20120121133620.GA10602@1wt.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120121133620.GA10602@1wt.eu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 02:36:20PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 12:52:12PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 09:37:07PM +0100, Tim Gardner wrote: > > > On 01/11/2012 04:12 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > >As I previously stated, in this email, I already have someone lined up > > > >to maintain 2.6.32 after I am done with it, but I'm sure that person > > > >would love it if you would send any needed patches to > > > >stable@vger.kernel.org to help them out. > > > > > > > >greg k-h > > > > > > I'm happy to work with whomever. Your original email with "it might > > > be picked up by someone else, but I'm not going to promise anything" > > > didn't seem that definite. > > > > Sorry, I didn't want to put words in the mouth of someone else, but > > given that Willy has done a great job with 2.4 and 2.6.16, I'm pretty > > sure he will continue to do well with 2.6.32. > > Thanks for the nice comment :-) Please note that I did not work on > 2.6.16, Adrian did, I only worked on .20 and .27. Ah, you are right, sorry about that, too many different trees :) But also note that Adrian didn't really follow the "stable rules", so I don't count that as proper maintaining of that tree. > Yes I'm still interested in taking over 2.6.32 when you give it up. I > must admit I've got quite silent last months, slowly trying to find time > to backport 2.6.32 fixes into .27, and still a bit afraid by the added > complexity of the new publication model. Time will tell. This weel-end > I hope to be able to produce 2.6.27.60-rc1. > > What is very important to me is that I want people to complain if they > find that I'm too slow, as I don't want to degrade the quality of the > stable series by taking a position someone would take better. I don't think you will do a bad job at all, You'll do fine, if you need any help, feel free to ask. thanks, greg k-h