lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] docs: update kernel versions and dates in tables
From
Date
On 05/24/2018 12:20 AM, Tim Bird wrote:
> Every once in a while, we should update the examples
> to reflect more recent kernel versions.
>
> Update the tables describing kernel releases, the merge window,
> and current longterm maintained kernel, from 2.6-era kernels
> to 4.x.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tim Bird <tim.bird@sony.com>
> ---
> Documentation/process/2.Process.rst | 72 +++++++++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/2.Process.rst b/Documentation/process/2.Process.rst
> index ce5561b..a9c46dd 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/2.Process.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/2.Process.rst
> @@ -18,17 +18,17 @@ major kernel release happening every two or three months. The recent
> release history looks like this:
>
> ====== =================
> - 2.6.38 March 14, 2011
> - 2.6.37 January 4, 2011
> - 2.6.36 October 20, 2010
> - 2.6.35 August 1, 2010
> - 2.6.34 May 15, 2010
> - 2.6.33 February 24, 2010
> + 4.11 April 30, 2017
> + 4.12 July 2, 2017
> + 4.13 September 3, 2017
> + 4.14 November 12, 2017
> + 4.15 January 28, 2018
> + 4.16 April 1, 2018
> ====== =================
>
> -Every 2.6.x release is a major kernel release with new features, internal
> -API changes, and more. A typical 2.6 release can contain nearly 10,000
> -changesets with changes to several hundred thousand lines of code. 2.6 is
> +Every 4.x release is a major kernel release with new features, internal
> +API changes, and more. A typical 4.x release contain about 13,000
> +changesets with changes to several hundred thousand lines of code. 4.x is
> thus the leading edge of Linux kernel development; the kernel uses a
> rolling development model which is continually integrating major changes.
>
> @@ -70,20 +70,19 @@ will get up to somewhere between -rc6 and -rc9 before the kernel is
> considered to be sufficiently stable and the final 2.6.x release is made.
> At that point the whole process starts over again.
>
> -As an example, here is how the 2.6.38 development cycle went (all dates in
> -2011):
> +As an example, here is how the 4.16 development cycle went (all dates in
> +2018):
>
> ============== ===============================
> - January 4 2.6.37 stable release
> - January 18 2.6.38-rc1, merge window closes
> - January 21 2.6.38-rc2
> - February 1 2.6.38-rc3
> - February 7 2.6.38-rc4
> - February 15 2.6.38-rc5
> - February 21 2.6.38-rc6
> - March 1 2.6.38-rc7
> - March 7 2.6.38-rc8
> - March 14 2.6.38 stable release
> + January 28 4.15 stable release
> + February 11 4.16-rc1, merge window closes
> + February 18 4.16-rc2
> + February 25 4.16-rc3
> + March 4 4.16-rc4
> + March 11 4.16-rc5
> + March 18 4.16-rc6
> + March 25 4.16-rc7
> + April 1 4.17 stable release
> ============== ===============================
>
> How do the developers decide when to close the development cycle and create
> @@ -99,37 +98,42 @@ release is made. In the real world, this kind of perfection is hard to
> achieve; there are just too many variables in a project of this size.
> There comes a point where delaying the final release just makes the problem
> worse; the pile of changes waiting for the next merge window will grow
> -larger, creating even more regressions the next time around. So most 2.6.x
> +larger, creating even more regressions the next time around. So most 4.x
> kernels go out with a handful of known regressions though, hopefully, none
> of them are serious.
>
> Once a stable release is made, its ongoing maintenance is passed off to the
> "stable team," currently consisting of Greg Kroah-Hartman. The stable team
> -will release occasional updates to the stable release using the 2.6.x.y
> +will release occasional updates to the stable release using the 4.x.y
> numbering scheme. To be considered for an update release, a patch must (1)
> fix a significant bug, and (2) already be merged into the mainline for the
> next development kernel. Kernels will typically receive stable updates for
> a little more than one development cycle past their initial release. So,
> -for example, the 2.6.36 kernel's history looked like:
> +for example, the 4.13 kernel's history looked like:
>
> ============== ===============================
> - October 10 2.6.36 stable release
> - November 22 2.6.36.1
> - December 9 2.6.36.2
> - January 7 2.6.36.3
> - February 17 2.6.36.4
> + September 3 4.13 stable release
> + September 13 4.13.1
> + September 20 4.13.2
> + September 27 4.13.3
> + October 5 4.13.4
> + October 12 4.13.5
> + ... ...
> + November 24 4.13.16
> ============== ===============================
>
> -2.6.36.4 was the final stable update for the 2.6.36 release.
> +4.13.16 was the final stable update of the 4.13 release.
>
> Some kernels are designated "long term" kernels; they will receive support
> for a longer period. As of this writing, the current long term kernels
> and their maintainers are:
>
> - ====== ====================== ===========================
> - 2.6.27 Willy Tarreau (Deep-frozen stable kernel)
> - 2.6.32 Greg Kroah-Hartman
> - 2.6.35 Andi Kleen (Embedded flag kernel)
> + ====== ====================== ==============================
> + 3.16 Ben Hutchings (very long-term stable kernel)
> + 4.1 Sasha Levin
> + 4.4 Greg Kroah-Hartman (very long-term stable kernel)
> + 4.9 Greg Kroah-Hartman
> + 4.14 Greg Kroah-Hartman
> ====== ====================== ===========================

Is  4.14 not very long-term stable kernel ?

>
> The selection of a kernel for long-term support is purely a matter of a


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-03 08:11    [W:0.105 / U:0.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site