![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
>> > The well-defined resync points are the 2.5.N releases. If -pre goes away, >> > then the dot-releases might need to come a little closer together, that's all. >> >> I agree. >> >> I've told myself that I shouldn't have done "-preX" releases at all in >> 2.5.x - the "real" numbers have become diluted by them, and I suspect the >> -pre's are really just because I got used to making them during the >> over-long 2.4.x time. > > I believe -pre's are still important. Daily snapshots are too likely to be > broken, and "real" releases are different from -pre ones (with *usefull* > difference): you can ignore -pre release, but you can't ignore real release > (because real releases are relative to each other). Pavel, I think it is an delusion. In practical terms we have a string of -pre and traditional releases which differ really little in terms of reliability. I number of 2.5.x without -pre fail to compile different non-core modules. 2.5.9 hangs on boot on my machine, while -preX worked. Marcelo pays more attention to stabilizing suffixless releases, and as well he should. However, I do not see how this can be meaningfuly done in 2.5.x. I am not going to shed any tears over the demise of -pre in unstable series, provided that releases get spaced tighter, with smaller patch size between them. -- Pete - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:22 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||