[elrepo] Can we rename kernel-ml to something more correct?

[Dave Chiluk]

I completely understand, and I don't really have a great suggestion for a
better name.  I don't think further documentation is really necessary.

Thanks for entertaining my request.
Dave.

On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 1:35 AM Phil Perry <phil at elrepo.org> wrote:

> On 05/09/18 22:46, Dave Chiluk via elrepo wrote:
> > I had to explain this again today.  @alan, or @akemi, thoughts?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dave.
> >
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> It's unlikely to be renamed, given the long history now. We did consider
> the naming very carefully when the packages were originally conceived
> and we have revisited that decision again now but do not feel renaming
> is warranted. The kernel-ml packages are built from the sources
> available from the "mainline stable" branch, i.e the results of Linus'
> -rcX "development tree" release candidates.
>
> I also feel it is a question of perspective. You may view (and prefer
> the name) kernel-ml as -stable, but from an Enterprise Linux
> perspective, someone else may view the distro kernel as the "stable"
> kernel and kernel-ml as a cutting edge alternative. Hence personally, I
> do not feel "stable" is a good fit to describe kernel-ml for the
> Enterprise Linux world in which we operate.
>
> We are quite happy to add some further documentation to either the Wiki
> or release announcements to help clarify exactly what it is that is
> being offered if folks are genuinely struggling with this. T be honest
> though, I think this is the first time it's been raised. Most confusion
> seems to arise around kernel-lt versions.
>
> Phil
>
>
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 2:06 PM Dave Chiluk <dchiluk at indeed.com
> > <mailto:dchiluk at indeed.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     If I'm not mistaken in kernel-ml, ml stands for mainline.  This is
> >     actually quite a misnomer as kernel.org <http://kernel.org> uses
> >     mainline to refer to Linus' development tree.  In actuality
> >     kernel-ml is instead built off of the stable tree.  I've seen a
> >     number of people get confused by this nuance.
> >
> >     I know it would suck to do, but it really feels like it should be
> >     named something like kernel-stable *(because of kernel.org
> >     <http://kernel.org> conventions), or possibly kernel-st (for
> >     short-term).  I'm not really sure what the correct name should be,
> >     but I'm certain it should not be kernel-ml.
> >
> >     We could even create a transitional kernel-ml package that depends
> >     on the newly named rpm to provide a no-brainer upgrade path.
> >
> >     Thanks,
> >     Dave.
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> elrepo mailing list
> elrepo at lists.elrepo.org
> http://lists.elrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/elrepo
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.elrepo.org/pipermail/elrepo/attachments/20180906/03fe844a/attachment.html>