On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 5:14 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 05.07.2008 15:54, drago01 wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 2:56 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> >>> - a karama of "+3" in bodhi seems not enough for a auto-move from testing >>> to >>> stable (or even worse: straight to stable if enough people tested the >>> kernel >>> and gave their +1 after the update got filed in bodhi but *before* it >>> actually hit fedora-testing) if there are no other pressing issues (like >>> security fixes). The kernel is a to complex beast; more then 3 people >>> should >>> be needed to give a +1. And a bit of time needs to pass to give enough >>> people the opportunity to install, test and report problems with new >>> kernels. >> >> Well the problem is not the patches that are being shipped but bodhi. > > Yes and no. The patches are quite big and carry a additional risk. We don't > take such risk in other areas (Sound, LAN, Storage -- there for similar > reasons it might make sense) -- so why should we take that risk for WLAN > drivers in stable releases (might be something else for rawhide now and > then)? > > There was a reasons until now (upstream sucked until a few months ago), but > we IMHO have to stop that sooner or later (otherwise Alsa maintainers, Jeff > G./Alan Cox might want to do the same and then it really becomes > problematic). As the most important WLAN bits are in the kernel now with > 2.6.26 it's IMHO a good time to think about slowing down a bit. Of cause we > can still cherry picking some improvements if we want. Well if the upstream maintainer sees a need for this why not? (given the changes go to testing first) >> Auto pushing for something like the kernel should be disabled, to >> prevent such stuff from happening. >> The bug you are referring to, has been resolved quickly, if the kernel >> stayed in testing (ie no autopush) it would not have hit stable with >> this bug.(same for other, non wireless related issues). > > Well, that is round about what I said in my discussion point just in > slightly different words ;-) Well this is because we agree here ;) _______________________________________________ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
