ACPI patch flow

DISCUSSION Len Brown 2 participants 3 messages Feb 2, 2004 – Feb 3, 2004 2 messages not in the archive ACPI

Share & tools

Len Brown

author

2004-02-02 18:46 UTC #0 lore raw

In an effort to make sure the latest ACPI patch is widely available, I currently publish it both as bk trees and plain patches
http://linux-acpi.bkbits.net/
http://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/lenb/acpi/patches/release/

against 7 releases:

2.4.22
2.4.23
2.4.24
2.4.25

2.6.0
2.6.1
2.6.2

I'd like to stop maintaining (and delete) 2.4.23 -- with the release of 2.4.24, I doubt anybody is using 2.4.23.

I'd like to stop maintaining (and delete) 2.6.0 -- with the release of 2.6.1, I doubt anybody is using 2.6.0. Also, 2.6.1 has diverged somewhat from 2.6.0, so maintaining 2.6.0 has become problematic.

let me know if you have any issues with this.

thanks,
-Len

-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn

A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]

Pavel Machek

2004-02-03 12:28 UTC #2 lore raw

Hi!

Quoted 16 lines

In an effort to make sure the latest ACPI patch is widely available, I currently publish it both as bk trees and plain patches
http://linux-acpi.bkbits.net/
http://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/lenb/acpi/patches/release/
against 7 releases:
2.4.22
2.4.23
2.4.24
2.4.25
2.6.0
2.6.1
2.6.2

Quoted 8 lines

I'd like to stop maintaining (and delete) 2.4.23 -- with the release of 2.4.24, I doubt anybody is using 2.4.23.
I'd like to stop maintaining (and delete) 2.6.0 -- with the release of 2.6.1, I doubt anybody is using 2.6.0. Also, 2.6.1 has diverged somewhat from 2.6.0, so maintaining 2.6.0 has become problematic.
let me know if you have any issues with this.

I do not see any problems with that.

For 2.6, if I were you, I'd drop 2.6.1, too. People should upgrade to latest if they have problems..

Signature · 9 lines

When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn

A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 20040203122832.GA1405-I/[email protected]

Len Brown

author

2004-02-03 13:01 UTC #4 lore raw

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 7 lines
I'd like to stop maintaining (and delete) 2.4.23 -- with the release of 2.4.24, I doubt anybody is using 2.4.23.
I'd like to stop maintaining (and delete) 2.6.0 -- with the release of 2.6.1, I doubt anybody is using 2.6.0. Also, 2.6.1 has diverged somewhat from 2.6.0, so maintaining 2.6.0 has become problematic.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line
let me know if you have any issues with this.
I do not see any problems with that.
For 2.6, if I were you, I'd drop 2.6.1, too. People should upgrade to latest if they have problems..

Encourage upgrades to the latest -- I agree. The downside, however, is when the latest causes new problems -- so I'll keep 2.6.1 around for comparisons until after 2.6.2 comes out. (or until divergence makes it a pain to maintain;-)

Also, when we reach the point that distros base a release on 2.6, it is useful to have a tree of the same vintage to make patching the distro tree viable.

thanks,
-Len