On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 16:19:43 -0700 Greg KH <gre...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 12:50:32AM +0200, Peter Stuge wrote: > > Greg KH wrote: > > > See above for why it is not easy at all, and, why even if we do > > > know some fixes are security ones, we would not tag them as such > > > anyway. > > > > I think this supports the argument that the better kernel is always > > the one with the most fixes.
Define "better"; because 3.10.0 has also been worse than the last 3.9 release in some ways, despite it having more fixes than the last 3.9. > > Rather than separating "bug fixes" from "security fixes" maybe it's > > wiser to think about separating "fixes" from "features" - this may > > be easier, but still not neccessarily easy. > > For stable kernel releases, that type of thing should be quite easy > for someone to do, if they want to do it, as the only type of > "features" I take for them are new device ids. > > But I fail to see how marking 5 patches out of 100 as "features" is > really doing to do much for anyone, do you? Preferably this would be done for any release, a release like 3.10.0 doesn't have to be an exception; it does contain a lot more features. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
