On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 16:12 -0400, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > +Stable kernel releases > +---------------------- > + > +Stable kernels are released when they are ready. This means there is no > +strict guidelines for sticking to specific dates for a kernel release. there are no strict guidelines > +After a maintainer has sent his pull request to Linus during the merge > +window no further new development will be accepted for that tree and > +as such it marks the closure of development for that subsystem for that > +kernel cycle. Developers wishing to target deadlines should simply work > +on their development without regards or consideration for inclusion to > +a specific kernel release. Once development is done it should simply be > +posted. If you insist on targetting a kernel release for deadlines you can targeting > +try to be aware of the current rc cycle development and how soon it seems > +the next stable kernel relase will be made. When Linus notes the last rc release > +cycle released may be the last -- that is a good sign you should already > +have all your development done and merged in the respective development > +tree. If your code is not ready and merged into the respective maintainers > +tree prior to the announced last potential rc kernel release chances are > +you missed getting your code in for the next kernel merge window. > +Excemptions here are new drivers, covered below. Exemptions > +rc-series rules > +--------------- > + > +Rules on what kind of patches are accepted after the merge window closes. > +These are patches targetted for the kernel rc-series of a kernel prior targeted > +to its release. > + > + - it must fix a reported regression > + - if must fix a reported security hole > + - if must fix a reported oops/kernel hang > + > +This means any small-non-fix code changes, although they mix fix an issue, might fix > +will not be accepted. If the patch in question is for a driver that has been > +around for more than a kernel release, then "small fixes" really can't be > +worth all that much. And "small fixes" may be small and "obvious" they > +definitely can regress. > + > +rc-series new driver excemption rule exemption > +------------------------------------ > + > +The very first release a new driver (or filesystem) is special. New drivers > +are accepted during the rc series. Patches for the same driver then are > +also accepted uring the same rc series of a kernel as well as fixes as it during > +cannot regress as no previous kernels exists with it. > + > +Once drivers are upstream for one kernel release (say on 2.6.29) the target > +*goal* after the merge window of the next kernel (respectively this would be > +the 2.6.30 rc-series) is to address address regressions. Kernel oops/hangs s/address address/address/ > +and security issues are obviously accepted but the point is these should have > +also been caught earlier as a general development goal. The rc-series focus > +should really be to address regressions. > + > +Stable kernel rules > +------------------- > + > Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the > "-stable" tree: Sorry, I'm in pedantic mood today. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
