[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f9a466e8-99aa-ddb0-de2e-d17b66cb64f7@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 09:57:16 -0800
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
Scott Branden <scott.branden@...adcom.com>,
BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: 5.10 LTS Kernel: 2 or 6 years?
On 2/18/2021 9:53 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 09:21:13AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> As a company, we are most likely shooting ourselves in the foot by not
>> having a point of coordination with the Linux Foundation and key people
>> like you, Greg and other participants in the stable kernel.
>
> What does the LF have to do with this?
I did not know whether the commitment/plan to use a given LTS kernel had
to be funneled through the Linux Foundation and then down to you, but I
am happy that this can be done publicly via a mailing list instead.
>
> We are here, on the mailing lists, working with everyone. Just test the
> -rc releases we make and let us know if they work or not for you, it's
> not a lot of "coordination" needed at all.
>
> Otherwise, if no one is saying that they are going to need these for 6
> years and are willing to use it in their project (i.e. and test it),
> there's no need for us to maintain it for that long, right?
Right, that is straight forward, works for me!
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists