On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 22:19 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 17:43 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 17:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > [...] > > > The earlier we freeze the kernel, the more work will be required to > > > backport fixes and hardware enablement during the jessie support period. > > > So I think that 3.16 would be the best fit. > > > > > > It is also very unlikely that a PREEMPT_RT patchset will be available > > > for 3.15 or 3.17, but there probably will be one for 3.16. > > > > > > I won't have time to take on maintenance of another longterm stable > > > branch besides 3.2, so I think it is important that the version we use > > > can be based on a longterm stable branch maintained by someone else. On > > > that basis, I would like to propose to Greg K-H that his next longterm > > > branch be based on 3.16. > > [...] > > > > I did talk to Greg about this, but as you probably all know by now, he > > selected 3.14 as there are other major users with earlier freeze dates > > than us. > > OOI who is it that is going to be basing on 3.14? I don't know specifically, but he implied that consumer electronics companies would be using it in a lot of products. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your own home. - Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman, `Good Omens'
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part