[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: starting with 2.7
On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 01:36:21PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> This is the model that we used with the
>> 2.3.x series, where the time between releases was often quite short.
>> That worked fairly well, but we stopped doing it when the introduction
>> of BitKeeper eliminated the developer synch-up problem. But perhaps
>> we've gone too far between 2.6.x releases, and should shorten the time
>> in order to force more testing.

On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:59:27PM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> It is also the model we used until OLS this year - there was a 2.6
> release about once a month prior to OLS. Post OLS, it's now once
> every three months or there abouts, which, IMO is far too long.
> I really liked the way pre-OLS 2.6 was working... it means I don't
> have to twiddle my fingers getting completely bored waiting for the
> next 2.6 release to happen. Can we return to that methodology please?


-- wli
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:0.358 / U:7.200 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site