linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] KS Topic request: Handling the Stable kernel, let's dump the cc: stable tag

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 18 Jul 2013 10:45:47 +0300
From:	Kalle Valo <kvalo@...rom.com>
To:	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Cc:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] KS Topic request: Handling the Stable kernel, let's dump the cc: stable tag

"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com> writes:

> Is having a flood of fixes in x.y.1 any worse than having to got to an
> -rc8 or an -rc9?

I think it's better to send less fixes to -rc8 or -rc9 and focus more on
testing. That way there should be less regressions in later stages of
-rc releases and especially in the final x.y.0 release.

Most of the time I don't even consider updating to the stable releases,
I just wait for the next .0 release from Linus. For this kind of
workflow there is a clear advantage of slowing down patch flow before
the release, better chances of not needing to update the kernel that
often.

-- 
Kalle Valo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/