[arch-dev-public] introducing kernel26-lts

Eric Bélanger snowmaniscool at gmail.com
Wed Aug 26 15:29:55 EDT 2009

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Ronald van Haren<pressh at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:20 AM, Aaron Griffin<aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Andreas Radke<a.radke at arcor.de> wrote:
>>> i686 version is now also available.
>>> to the devs: please post your opinions where it should go after the
>>> testing period? do you want it in extra or as official alternative even
>>> in core?
>>> I'd prefer extra but would also like to see this kernel as a 2nd choice
>>> on our future iso snapshots.
>> I agree it might be nice to have a choice, but I also think that if
>> we're going to make sure something is stable, we should try to enforce
>> some sort of signoff process, just to ensure it's all working ok
> agreed, it should go into core where we have to signoff. It would be
> funny to find out that our lts kernel is broken at some time... people
> expect something more 'stable' than the latest kernel so we have to
> make sure that it works fine.
> Ronald

I don't think that it needs to go in core to get signoffs.  We could
put it in extra and make an exception (i.e. require signoff).  The
only advantage of putting it in core is to offer it as an alternative
kernel for the iso.

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list