On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 09:51 +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: > Hi, > > I saw a post in https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/8/20/675 by Greg-KH > > >> As I'm getting a few questions about this, and I realized that I never > >> sent out an email about this, yes, the 3.4 kernel tree will be the next > >> -longterm kernel that I will be maintaining for at least 2 years. > >> > >> Currently I'm maintaining the following stable kernel trees for the > >> following amount of time: > >> 3.0 - for at least one more year > >> 3.4 - for at least two years > >> 3.5 - until 3.6.1 is out > >> > >> Hope this helps clear up any rumors floating around. If anyone has any > >> questions, please let me know. > > Just a question: > 3.4 is also LTS. Using 3.2 for Wheezy cycle is better than 3.4? Don't know for sure, but we are committed to using a base version of 3.2. > Using old kernel is sometimes hard to import new drivers for new > hardware, I guess. I know 3.2.x is stable enough and we're in freeze > already, but Wheezy kernel will be used until 2016 or so. Which is why I volunteered to maintain 3.2.y and intend to do so for that period. (Which you may note is longer than Greg will maintain 3.4.y.) > If we choose > 3.4, then can get nice features and new drivers with less kernel > maintainer team work, it's better. We can also get more regressions, too. Drivers and other features can often be backported; in fact, we've done that already. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings One of the nice things about standards is that there are so many of them.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part