Messages in this thread | | | From | John Bradford <> | Subject | Re: 2.5.60 cheerleading... | Date | Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:11:17 +0000 (GMT) |
| |
> > Likewise with kernel releases - fewer, larger releases work fine and > > mean less effort for developers, unless something breaks, in which > > case there is a lot to go through to locate the problem, and people > > who can't boot the broken kernel have to wait longer to test other > > things that were newly merged in that release. > This was exactly what I was getting at. I suspect that there are a good > number of people that try to boot a 2.5 kernel for testing, run into > immediate problems, and shelve the idea of 2.5 testing for a couple of > months because of an immediate appearance that 2.5 is too unstable to > test. I've seen frequent griping that not enough testing happens, the > idea is to get it to a point where more people can test it _without_ > adding a huge delay or making a huge gap between releases.
I can see what you mean, but realistically, I don't see how it's practical.
You can always use 2.5.X-BK1 to get the fixes that we would probably have been in 2.5.X if Linus had done more extensive testing on it before releasing it.
John. - 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/
| |