linux-kernel - Re: [stable] 4 -stable kernel review cycles starting

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]

Message-ID: <20100701231729.GA13598@kroah.com>
Date:	Thu, 1 Jul 2010 16:17:29 -0700
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Florian Fainelli <florian@...nwrt.org>,
	stable-review@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, stable@...nel.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [stable] 4 -stable kernel review cycles starting

On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 04:09:01PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jul 2010 15:51:29 -0700 Greg KH wrote:
> > If you don't like this type of review cycle, what would you prefer?
> 
> I don't see a magic bullet answer here.  I think that it would help
> somewhat for the stable maintainer(s) to have only one -stable review
> cycle (new posting) per day, but someone may not like that either,
> since it would have the effect of delaying some stable kernel releases
> (not to mention muck up your workload).

Yeah, that would mess with the workload management a lot.  And I don't
see the benifit of doing a different release on different days.  Just
because they are different kernels, the same patches are usually being
applied to all of them, so they are very much alike usually.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/