Messages in this thread | | | From | Ed Tomlinson <> | Subject | Re: My thoughts on the "new development model" | Date | Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:19:56 -0400 |
| |
On Tuesday 26 October 2004 07:09, Massimo Cetra wrote: > > On Tuesday 26 October 2004 01:40, Chuck Ebbert wrote: > > > Bill Davidsen wrote: > > > > > > > I don't see the need for a development kernel, and it is > > desirable > > > > to be > > > > able to run kernel.org kernels. > > > > > > Problem is, kernel.org 'release' kernels are quite buggy. For > > > example 2.6.9 has a long list of bugs: > > > > > > Sure, the next release will (may?) fix these bugs, but it will > > > definitely add a whole set of new ones. > > > > > To my mind this just points out the need for a bug fix > > branch. e.g. a > > branch containing just bug/security fixes against the current > > stable kernel. It might also be worth keeping the branch > > active for the n-1 stable kernel too. > > To my mind, we only need to make clear that a stable kernel is a stable > kernel. > Not a kernel for experiments. > > To my mind, stock 2.6 kernels are nice for nerds trying patches and > willing to recompile their kernel once a day. They are not suitable for > servers. Several times on testing machines, switching from a 2.6 to the > next one has caused bugs on PCI, acpi, networking and so on. > > The direction is lost. How many patchsets for vanilla kernel exist? > > Someone has decided that linux must go on desktops as well and > developing new magnificent features for desktop users is causing serious > problems to the ones who use linux at work on production servers. > > 2.4 tree is still the best solution for production. > 2.6 tree is great for gentoo users who like gcc consuming all CPU > (maxumum respect to gentoo but I prefer debian)
The issue is that Linus _has_ changed the development model. What we have now is more flexable and much more responsive to changes. This does lead to stable releases that are not quite a stable as some of the previous stable series... This is why I suggest a fix/security branch. The idea being that after a month or so of fixes etc it will be a very stable kernel and it will not have slowed down development.
Ed - 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/
| |