[lkml]   [2010]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [ users] XZ Migration discussion
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:03:26AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > 3* Create a new subdirectory for every 2.6.x kernel, and move all the
> > related files there. This would shrink the main index drastically, and
> > each subdirectory would have a reasonable size (except maybe 2.6.16 and
> > 2.6.27.) Oddly enough this has been done for the files under testing/
> > already, so I am curious why we don't do it for the release files (and
> > the testing/incr/ files, while we're at it.)
> Well, part of the reason why is that we're functionally "stuck" on 2.6;
> a prefix which really has lost all meaning.
> It might open up the question if we shouldn't just do a Solaris and drop
> the leading 2 (so the next kernel would be 6.33) or call the kernel
> after that 3.0 instead of 2.6.34, and then 3.1 instead of 2.6.35.

Damn, we forgot to have that fight at Kernel Summit last year.

I'm in favour of the 3.0 / 3.1 / 3.2 with stable@ being responsible for
3.0.1, 3.0.2, 3.1.1, etc.

Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-02-12 21:27    [W:0.212 / U:3.808 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site