On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 13:27 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > > I also heard some managers decided their kernel source packages should > > have all the patches squashed together to make them harder to cherry- > > pick... could it have been the same company? > > Greg loves to tell stories about RH management, but really if he can > find any engineer who works for RH that says he can't work on stable > due to being told by management, I'd be surprised. Maybe when stable > first surfaced there was a hope of it being close to RHEL, but at this > point stable has little to no usefulness from a RHEL point of view, > and since nearly all the RH employed maintainers all do stable work, I > can't see why Greg would think this matters. And to stress that point. I myself work for Red Hat, and I'm very big into the stable tree. Heck, I maintain a 3.6 stable (not as well as "Greg" does, but I'm just a mere mortal). I don't know what managers Greg talked to, but I've been encouraged by management to mark bug fixes with the stable tag. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html