On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 05/17/2016 04:32 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson >> <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 03/16/2016 04:01 PM, Justin Forbes wrote: >>>> >>>> With the 4.5 kernel out and the merge window for 4.6 opened up, we had >>>> to make a decision on what the release kernel for F24 would be. The >>>> decision has been made to ship F24 with the 4.5 kernel with 4.6 >>>> available as an update once it is ready. Timing wise, 4.6 *should* >>>> release just before the final freeze for F24, but that is cutting it >>>> insanely close. Should Fedora move on as scheduled, and 4.6 have some >>>> delay due to a bug that impacts users, that would be unfortunate. >>>> This means we have a good bit of time to make sure that everything is >>>> working as intended with 4.5 in Fedora. It also means that any >>>> installer critical fixes will need to be backported to 4.5. >>> >>> >>> Given that 4.6 is out and current F24 final freeze is not scheduled until >>> 2016-05-31 should not F24 be released with the 4.6 kernel? >> >> I think the original logic is still sound. There have been three >> delays for Fedora 24 already, in the original schedule today was to be >> GA. I don't think it's worth any risk for another slip. >> > > So you prefer not catching potentially any bugs before final GA release but > rather expose them to the end users through 0 day update instead? I refuse the premise that the kernel team is going to release a 4.6.x kernel that isn't ready as a 0 day update. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
