From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 11:40:20 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Guenter Roeck Message-ID: <20160903104020.GR3950@sirena.org.uk> References: <57C78BE9.30009@linaro.org> <20160902012531.GB28461@sasha-lappy> <20160902095417.GJ3950@sirena.org.uk> <1472827326.2519.14.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20160903052914.GB17057@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="JcGvecxLhm+LytDG" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160903052914.GB17057@roeck-us.net> Cc: James Bottomley , "ltsi-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [Stable kernel] feature backporting collaboration List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --JcGvecxLhm+LytDG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 10:29:14PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Having said that, an effort like this may still be helpful, I just wonder what > the intended use case is. Is it for vendors to actually use the new LTS+feature > branch, or for vendors to cherry-pick features from it ? In our case it's both, though we provide less support for cherry picking features. --JcGvecxLhm+LytDG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXyqiPAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQGFAH/2Xc7lmBp4WQSPUG9df18g2o Y9Is5SdymFXyY4tJz3Gyn/mLG6nvHTSaqO6AZj71rEatgblvLgKVnMRZ7jhZYQu7 6Psmmx9jjY7M5/3u9+it3wTXM2qq6C/qEuKH0r3DoKDuysUhyANCSqV3Zp36yYkk dDj1VCdWZbcDiNHclR6MfTPy/3DQSsdQ/MvJSBH9QumeVjWCNJgbZ2zOW+HONH6c 9QTD2JPBJiKAvGECJDbQDCjbRKXby03dAWOjiK/dV3c3iUZWr0LF+cpZi4jEvy9Y i+m8e9Ro5YxCTOMn6jZIuZvS+6A1St3E/kpVmnkM8l51ZB9afQzLs7Ht/w9S5q8= =1tVM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --JcGvecxLhm+LytDG--