[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: 2.6.8 release

On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 09:09:56AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > After chatting w/ some of the -boot people on IRC, I'm unconvinced that 2
> > weeks is enough time.  We're talking about 4 and a half weeks total before
> > the packages enter testing, and that's assuming

> > a) 2.6.8 release happens within a week
> > b) it takes 2 weeks to get out of NEW

> With proper cooperation from the ftp-masters, this could happen much faster. I
> have asked in the past that the kernel packages get the same favorite
> treatment as the d-i packages, but nobody ever bothered to react on this. 

I think it's reasonable to ask for quicker NEW processing of a new
kernel release, if it's being targetted for an upcoming release.

> > c) it takes 10 days to get through sid into testing (ie, there's no
> > problems w/ the initial 2.6.8-1 release).

> There should be no major problem to upload with priority high, and use 2 days
> for this,

Yes, there is.  The security team has already made it clear that they
don't intend to support multiple minor kernel revisions in sarge; and
d-i will pick whatever provides kernel-image-2.6 by default.  So
introducing a new upstream kernel as the default is not something that
should be done with haste, and introducing a new upstream kernel that
*won't* be the default is a waste of time from a release standpoint.  If
you intend to target 2.6.8 for sarge, you'll need to have a plan for
getting all architectures (at least the ones built from the same source)
in sync and using 2.6.8 as the *only* 2.6 kernel-image we ship.

> > We should find out within the next few days when main freezes. The release
> > people with whom I've talked w/ don't seem interested in special-casing
> > kernel packages once main is frozen (and I can't blame them).

> I have the belief that if our kernel people believe that 2.6.8 is the kernel
> we should use, based on the fact that security would be easier if redhat is
> releasing with it too, and the fact that it is mostly bugfix and stability
> improvement over 2.6.7, then i believe it is worth delaying the release a few
> days for this. There will probably be enough other stuff delaying the release
> that we can afford to wait for this.

Planning to violate the release schedule is not encouraged.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: