On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 16:19:14 +0000 Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >Wait! What does that mean? What's the purpose of stable if it is as > >broken as mainline? > > This just means that if there is a fix that went in mainline, and the > fix is broken somehow, we'd rather take the broken fix than not. > > In this scenario, *something* will be broken, it's just a matter of > what. We'd rather have the same thing broken between mainline and > stable. Honestly, I think that removes all value of the stable series. I remember when the stable series were first created. People were saying that it wouldn't even get to more than 5 versions, because the bar for backporting was suppose to be very high. Today it's just a fork of the kernel at a given version. No more features, but we will be OK with regressions. I'm struggling to see what the benefit of it is suppose to be? -- Steve
