On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 03:55:03PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote: > Hypothesis 1: using an older kernel in testing results in fewer > vulnerabilities > > Criteria: fewer vulnerabilities in lenny than squeeze during squeeze > testing cycle > Evidence: lenny's kernel was vulnerable to 67% of the vulnerabilities that > squeeze > Conclusion: hypothesis verified
Actually you did not yet proof this. Please do it. > Criteria: fewer vulnerabilities in squeeze than wheezy during wheezy > testing cycle > Evidence: to be collected # vulnerabilities in squeeze and wheezy > Conclusion: to be determined > > Hypothesis 2: using an older kernel version makes less work to provide CUT > > Criteria: how often CUT target release date is met > Evidence: to be collected monthly release date by retaining 2.6.32 and > monthly > for standard unstable->testing transitions > (note: requires a 2.6.32-only period for reference) > Conclusion: to be determined Hypothesis 3: Testing users wants old software Criteria: to be determined Evidence: easy Conclusion: sorry, no chance > I can't imagine anyone else being put through such a arduous process > to try an experiment for a couple months. Why does it have to be so > difficult? You can run you little experiment. For blocking packages please persuade the release team as responsible entity within Debian. Bastian -- The joys of love made her human and the agonies of love destroyed her. -- Spock, "Requiem for Methuselah", stardate 5842.8 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110219212817.ga27...@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org