[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20060921.145208.26283973.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:52:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: jeff@...zik.org
Cc: davidsen@....com, torvalds@...l.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.19 -mm merge plans
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:33:27 -0400
> Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > I think it would help if you went back to using meaningful names for
> > releases, because 2.6.19-test1 is pretty clearly a test release even to
> > people who can't figure out if a number is odd or even. Then after
> > people stop reporting show stoppers, change to rc numbers, where rc
> > versions are actually candidates for release without known major bugs.
>
> Actually, considering our group of developers, I think "-rc" has been
> remarkably successful at staying on the "bug fixes only" theme.
I agree.
But even on that note I would love to have a release cycle where I
didn't merge any new features and could work entirely on the bugs
that never get worked on.
Sure, I'll still be merging new features into my "N + 1" tree.
But my pure interactions with Linus's tree can focus entirely
on bug fixing, and I really want an environment in which to
concentrate on that exclusively.
I think the even/odd idea is great, personally. And if this
makes some people have to wait a little bit longer for their
favorite feature to get merged, that's tough. :-)
I truly think we need to move towards a more stability minded
mode and back off on the new features just a bit.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists