Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] stable issues

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 08:54:31AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com> wrote:
> > I've been dealing with stable kernels. There are some issues that I noticed
> > and may be worth discussing.
> >
> > - Too many LTS kernels?
> >
> > 2.6.32  Willy Tarreau
> > 3.2     Ben Huchings
> > 3.4     Greg
> > 3.10    Greg
> > 3.12    Jiry Slaby
> >
> > Too many or not? Is it good or bad? One of the problem is the maintenance
> > burden. For example, DaveM has to prepare stable patches for 5 stable
> > kernels: 3.2, 3.4, 3.10, 3.12 and 3.14.
> 
> To be fair, he doesn't have to.  He chooses to, and it's great.
> 
> > - Equip Greg with a sub-maintainer?
> >
> > I found 3.4.x lacked hundreds of fixes compared to 3.2.x. It's mainly
> > because Ben has been manually backporting patches which don't apply
> > cleanly, while Greg just doesn't have the time budget. Is it possible
> > that we find a sub-maintainer to do this work?
> 
> I think you've already shown exactly how we can handle that.  It just
> takes someone willing to do the work to dig in.  Greg seemed very
> pleased with the patches for 3.4 being sent to him, and I know he's
> thanked me each time I send a report of what Fedora is carrying on top
> of a stable release.  Do we need something more formal that what
> either of us have already done (or continue to do)?

I am really happy with people helping me out, and have asked for help in
the past.

The 3.4 patch work that has been going on is a great example of that,
and one that I am behind on in catching up with, due to travel, sorry.

If people want to come up with other ways of helping me, I'm all for it :)

thanks,

greg k-h