Re: [PATCH 4.19 00/93] 4.19.81-stable review

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 07:59:32PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2019-10-29 19:02:33, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 05:24:19PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.81 release.
> > > > There are 93 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > > > to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > > > let me know.
> > > > 
> > > > Responses should be made by Tue 29 Oct 2019 08:27:02 PM UTC.
> > > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > > 
> > > > Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 10:19:29 +0100
> > > > From: Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > To: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andrew Morton
> > > > Subject: Linux 4.19.81
> > > 
> > > > [-- The following data is signed --]
> > > 
> > > >  I'm announcing the release of the 4.19.81 kernel.
> > > 
> > > > All users of the 4.19 kernel series must upgrade.
> > > 
> > > Am I confused or was the 4.19.81 released a bit early?
> > 
> > I said:
> > 	Responses should be made by Tue 29 Oct 2019 08:27:02 PM UTC.
> > 
> > And I released at:
> > 	Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 10:19:29 +0100
> > 
> > So really, I was a few minutes late :)
> 
> I'm confused. You said "by Tue ... 08:27:02 PM UTC". That 8 PM is 20h,
> but did the release on 10h GMT+1, or 9h UTC -- 9 AM.... so like 11
> hours early, if I got the timezones right.
> 
> Does PM mean something else in the above context?

Ugh, no, you are right, I was ignoring the PM thing, I thought the -u
option to date would give me a 24 hour date string, and so I thought
that was 8:27 in the morning.

Let me mess around with 'date' to see if I can come up with a better
string to use here.  I guess:
	date --rfc-3339=seconds -u
would probably be best?

thanks,

greg k-h