1 |
On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 14:36:11 +0100 |
2 |
"Eric F. GARIOUD" <eric-f.garioud@×××××××.fr> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Thursday 21 March 2013 13:22:35 Tom Wijsman wrote: |
5 |
> |
6 |
> > As to address your question, it doesn't come down to intention but |
7 |
> > rather to manpower. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> I appreciate this. |
10 |
> However, when things go down to a problem of manpower, the very first |
11 |
> initiative common sense commands is to avoid wasting it. |
12 |
> And the first way I know to avoid wasting manpower is : |
13 |
> - displaying intentions ! |
14 |
> |
15 |
> I have asked here, in 3.4.9 times, for the intentions of the |
16 |
> gentoo-sources regarding the 3.4 LTS and was answered that it would |
17 |
> not be followed. |
18 |
|
19 |
Just like in last mail, I guess this was due to the lack of manpower; |
20 |
now that I joined we have time to do the 3.x LTS branches (lately I |
21 |
have been doing them all since I don't maintain that much packages |
22 |
yet; maybe mpagano is taking a time off, not sure but he seems busy...). |
23 |
|
24 |
> Fair enough, because I wanted the ck-sources to follow it, we made |
25 |
> the job of reviewing all upstream's patches from 3.4.9 up to 3.4.18 |
26 |
> and from there up to 3.4.23... and then discovered the gentoo-sources |
27 |
> catching up from 3.4.9 to 3.4.24. |
28 |
|
29 |
Times have changed, bumps for everything in 3.x we are following. :) |
30 |
|
31 |
> Of course I do not blame anybody for this, after all, each to his own. |
32 |
> However, the result of this is that we (as GS+CK) have almost |
33 |
> certainly achieved a great part of the dirty job twice ! |
34 |
|
35 |
Okay, I see where you are getting at; seems like this is also due to |
36 |
the nature of the kernel being split over multiple packages instead of |
37 |
using a single package with multiple USE flags. I've been wondering if |
38 |
there would be a benefit changing this model to ensure there is no lost |
39 |
manpower (regardless of the actual patches, we're also duplicating the |
40 |
kernel bumps / stabilization / ... as well). |
41 |
|
42 |
> Hence my first question regarding the gentoo-sources project's |
43 |
> intentions regarding the 3.6 and 3.7 branches. |
44 |
|
45 |
We won't touch them apart from important bug fixes and root privilege |
46 |
escalation security issues; but if you are willing to fix all the |
47 |
security bugs, we could make them available in genpatches to benefit |
48 |
everyone. Combining multiple security bug fixes together in each |
49 |
genpatch release then could make it accessible in revision bumps |
50 |
across all sources in and out of the tree. |
51 |
|
52 |
> Regards, |
53 |
> |
54 |
> Eric |
55 |
> |
56 |
|
57 |
|
58 |
With kind regards, |
59 |
|
60 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij) |
61 |
Gentoo Developer |
62 |
|
63 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o |
64 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D |
65 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D |