Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.0.31 : please! | From | Jes Degn Soerensen <> | Date | 18 Jul 1997 09:36:35 +0200 |
| |
>>>>> "Jon" == Jon Lewis <jlewis@inorganic5.fdt.net> writes:
Jon> On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: >> You're assuming that people will use the the beta versions. >> (Instead of being spoiled brats who don't do anything and just >> complain, complain, commplain.....) We already have the >> 2.0.30-pre2 release; if people don't test it with the name >> 2.0.30-pre2, will changing the name help?
Jon> 2.0.30-pre2 is not in the "expected" place in the kernel mirrors. Jon> Unless people know to look in the davem dir or on vger, they Jon> won't find it. Those who just look in kernel/v2.0 to find the Jon> "latest stable" kernel won't know about it. Maybe it should be Jon> moved into kernel/v2.0 or at least the LATEST-IS-2.0.30 could be Jon> traded for LATEST-IS-2.0.31-pre2.
Ok it may be a bit hard to find, but this is not such a bad thing after all. `pre' kernels are test kernels and people should never get the assumption that they are official releases. There are more than 2000 subscribers to linux-kernel, this should be a reasonable test base if we also consider that these people do not just shut their mouth and try to keep things a secret.
Changing the `LATEST-IS' is message is _not_ an option since it is the same as renaming the pre kernel to 2.0.31 and make it a new official release.
Isn't it about time to end this thread - lets get back to work.
Jes
| |