| 1 |
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:01:30 +0200 |
| 2 |
Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> I am suggesting that the latest available upstream kernel should |
| 5 |
> perhaps be the default for Gentoo users. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
See my previous e-mail; if you're willing to go through with this |
| 8 |
suggestion, then please back that up with sufficient reasoning. That |
| 9 |
is, state what is bad with gentoo-sources and state the advantages that |
| 10 |
would come with vanilla-sources; but don't forget to document the |
| 11 |
disadvantages as well, since there is no magic silver bullet here. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Would you upgrade more than hundreds to thousands of servers to 3.10.0? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Take a look at the whole picture; for example, Nouveau worked great in |
| 16 |
late 3.6 and regressed over a lot of people in early 3.7, so they had |
| 17 |
to wait for fixes to land in late 3.7 again. Another example? Here: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=468078#c0 |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
And there thousands of bugs to find on all the bug trackers out there |
| 22 |
that share this kind of nature; so, this is why you can't simple mark |
| 23 |
what upstream deems stable, but rather what our QA process deems stable. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Changing that QA process doesn't happen from one day onto the other; it |
| 26 |
has to be carefully thought out, documented, planned and announced. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
If not, it could affect Gentoo's image. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
With kind regards, |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij) |
| 34 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o |
| 37 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D |
| 38 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D |
Archives