lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: starting with 2.7
Date
From
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> said:

[...]

> The real key, as always, is getting users to download and test a
> release. So another approach might be to shorten the time between
> 2.6.x and 2.6.x+1 releases, so as to recreate more testing points,
> without training people to wait for -bk1, -bk2, -rc1, etc. before
> trying out the kernel code. 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.

Is there any estimate of the number of daily-straight-from-BK users? I'm
one, haven't seen any trouble (thus silent up to here).
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513
-
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 14:09    [W:0.230 / U:7.500 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site