Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2014-01-21 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 01/21/2014 07:58 AM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > On 14-01-21 10:10 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 08/07/2013 09:07 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: - Shouldn't the EOL status be mentioned in the www.kernel.org front page? >>> >>> It will be marked EOL at kernel.org when it is EOL. Those that ca

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2014-01-21 Thread Paul Gortmaker
On 14-01-21 10:10 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 08/07/2013 09:07 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >>> >>> - Shouldn't the EOL status be mentioned in the www.kernel.org front page? >> >> It will be marked EOL at kernel.org when it is EOL. Those that care >> about it being EOL would have seen the message

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2014-01-21 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 08/07/2013 09:07 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >> >> - Shouldn't the EOL status be mentioned in the www.kernel.org front page? > > It will be marked EOL at kernel.org when it is EOL. Those that care > about it being EOL would have seen the message about it becoming EOL in > the previous 2.6.34.x r

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2013-08-07 Thread Paul Gortmaker
[2.6.34.x longterm stable status] On 05/08/2013 (Mon 22:32) Aaro Koskinen wrote: > Hi, > > There hasn't been 2.6.34.x stable tree releases for a > while. Also, in some mails you have mentioned EOLing this tree (e.g. > http://marc.info/?l=linux-doc&m=137393133817894&w=2). I have two questions > co