[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: starting with 2.7
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 04:19:10PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> The problem with the -rc releases is that we try to predict in advance
> which releases in advance will be stable, and we don't seem to be able
> to do a good job of that.

I really like this description, it's the most accurate description I ever
read of an -rc release. I wish you could convince Linus with it.

The problem with -rc is that if we try to predict, it implies that we don't
expect to count much on user reports. Then why do an -rc at all if we don't
expect enough testings ?

> If we do a release every week, my guess is
> that at least 1 in 3 releases will turn out to be stable enough for
> most purposes. But we won't know until after 2 or 3 days which
> releases will be the good ones.

That's always been my point, and one of the reasons why *some* of Alan's
kernels work well.

> In practice, that's all the -rc releases are these days anyway (there
> are times when a 2.6.x-rcy release is more stable than 2.6.z). The
> problem is that since the -rc releases are called what they are
> called, they don't get enough testing.

Perfectly true. I would add that with -rc releases, people only upgrade when
we tell them that they can, while with more frequent releases, they upgrade
when they *need* to, and can try several versions if the first one they pick
does not work.


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:0.109 / U:8.336 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site