| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAPA4HGVYuZ3S+OxU9dXgPuqk1ERrYNshUe27M8QmN7c4+B7LAA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 02:33:48 +0200
From: Luis de Bethencourt <luis@...ethencourt.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] docs: update the development process document.
From: Luis de Bethencourt <luis@...ethencourt.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 04:03:46 +0200
Here's a set of changes updating Documentation/development-process.
I have updated the kernel releases.
Signed-off-by: Luis de Bethencourt <luis@...ethencourt.com>
---
Documentation/development-process/2.Process | 36 +++++++++++++++------------
1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/development-process/2.Process
b/Documentation/development-process/2.Process
index 4823577..2d79ddb 100644
--- a/Documentation/development-process/2.Process
+++ b/Documentation/development-process/2.Process
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ The kernel developers use a loosely time-based
release process, with a new
major kernel release happening every two or three months. The recent
release history looks like this:
+ 2.6.39 May 18, 2011
2.6.38 March 14, 2011
2.6.37 January 4, 2011
2.6.36 October 20, 2010
@@ -65,19 +66,18 @@ will get up to somewhere between -rc6 and -rc9
before the kernel is
considered to be sufficiently stable and the final 2.6.x release is made.
At that point the whole process starts over again.
-As an example, here is how the 2.6.38 development cycle went (all dates in
+As an example, here is how the 2.6.39 development cycle went (all dates in
2011):
- January 4 2.6.37 stable release
- January 18 2.6.38-rc1, merge window closes
- January 21 2.6.38-rc2
- February 1 2.6.38-rc3
- February 7 2.6.38-rc4
- February 15 2.6.38-rc5
- February 21 2.6.38-rc6
- March 1 2.6.38-rc7
- March 7 2.6.38-rc8
March 14 2.6.38 stable release
+ March 29 2.6.39-rc1, merge window closes
+ April 6 2.6.39-rc2
+ April 12 2.6.39-rc3
+ April 19 2.6.39-rc4
+ April 27 2.6.39-rc5
+ May 4 2.6.39-rc6
+ May 10 2.6.39-rc7
+ May 18 2.6.39 stable release
How do the developers decide when to close the development cycle and create
the stable release? The most significant metric used is the list of
@@ -103,13 +103,17 @@ numbering scheme. To be considered for an
update release, a patch must (1)
fix a significant bug, and (2) already be merged into the mainline for the
next development kernel. Kernels will typically receive stable updates for
a little more than one development cycle past their initial release. So,
-for example, the 2.6.36 kernel's history looked like:
+for example, the 2.6.38 kernel's history looked like:
- October 10 2.6.36 stable release
- November 22 2.6.36.1
- December 9 2.6.36.2
- January 7 2.6.36.3
- February 17 2.6.36.4
+ March 14 2.6.38 stable release
+ March 23 2.6.38.1
+ March 27 2.6.38.2
+ April 14 2.6.38.3
+ April 21 2.6.38.4
+ May 2 2.6.38.5
+ May 9 2.6.38.6
+ May 21 2.6.38.7
+ June 3 2.6.38.8
2.6.36.4 was the final stable update for the 2.6.36 release.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists