| 1 |
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 10:41:14PM +0000, Daniel Drake <dsd@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> FIXES |
| 3 |
> ===== |
| 4 |
> 1000-1400 linux-stable |
| 5 |
> 1400-1500 linux-stable queue |
| 6 |
> 1500-1600 architecture-related |
| 7 |
> 1600-1700 security |
| 8 |
> 1700-1800 mm/scheduling/misc |
| 9 |
> 1800-1900 filesystems |
| 10 |
> 1900-2000 networking core |
| 11 |
> 2000-2100 storage core |
| 12 |
> 2100-2000 power management (acpi, apm) |
| 13 |
> 2200-2300 bus (usb, ieee1394, pci, pcmcia, ...) |
| 14 |
> 2300-2400 network drivers |
| 15 |
> 2400-2500 storage drivers |
| 16 |
> 2500-2600 input |
| 17 |
> 2600-2800 media (graphics, sound, tv) |
| 18 |
> 2800-2900 other |
| 19 |
> 2900-4000 reserved |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> FEATURES |
| 22 |
> ======== |
| 23 |
> 4000-4100 network |
| 24 |
> 4100-4200 storage |
| 25 |
> 4200-4300 graphics |
| 26 |
> 4300-4400 filesystem |
| 27 |
> 4400-4500 other |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I assume the last number is exclusive ;) |
| 30 |
I can't see anything wrong. Looks good. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
For the best part the naming convention is trivial, afterall, its only |
| 33 |
really the patch order that matters - which is likely why the original |
| 34 |
lasted so long :) |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
I would maybe suggest making the security patch size that little bit bigger |
| 37 |
(hell, we have the room) and shrink linux-stable a little bit. This is |
| 38 |
directly relating to what we spoke about a while ago re: maintaining |
| 39 |
aging genpatches. This isn't vital though. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Cheers for that. |
| 42 |
- John |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
Role: Gentoo Linux Kernel Lead |
| 46 |
Gentoo Linux: http://www.gentoo.org |
| 47 |
Public Key: gpg --recv-keys 9C745515 |
| 48 |
Key fingerprint: A0AF F3C8 D699 A05A EC5C 24F7 95AA 241D 9C74 5515 |
Archives