Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:32:19 -0400 | From | Chuck Ebbert <> | Subject | Re: My thoughts on the "new development model" |
| |
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 at 08:03:13 -0700 William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> I'm running 2.6 on a number of machines I rely upon > heavily as servers etc. on the open net as well as the usual dedicated > kernel hacking machines. The uptimes of the relied-upon systems are > measured in months, at times approaching a year.
"It works for me" doesn't cut it in the OS world.
> More bugs are fixed than are introduced every release by a large margin.
Irrelevant.
> And not even your beloved 2.4 is immune to regressions.
We're not talking about regression, i.e. reappearance of old bugs.
> What does the number of patchsets have to do with anything?
Large changes produce bugs -- that's a fact of life.
It's not that the changes aren't needed, it's just the the previous 2.6 release is kind of like a baby abandoned on a doorstep -- nobody has the time to fix those last few bugs. Even if someone were to step up to the plate and try to create a stable 2.6 series, I'd bet the lead developers wouldn't even spend time working on it.
--Chuck Ebbert 26-Oct-04 12:31:08 - 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/
| |