[lkml]   [1999]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Shortening the Development Cycle... [maybe OffTopic, flame-bait?] (Joe) writes:

>say by this time such and such is done. Rather than useing a
>date, why not use a version number? Lets say 2.3.20 (pick one) .
>If you stuff is not in by that version number it does not get in
>this round. Then from 2.3.20 the kernel can be working on for
>fixes rather than new features. This means that hopefully by the
>time it reaches 2.3.25(?) it is stable enought to be released as

This idea gave us 0.99.14a - 0.99.14<x>


Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen --
TANSTAAFL! Consulting - Unix, Internet, Security

Hutweide 15 Fon.: 09131 / 50654-0 "There ain't no such
D-91054 Buckenhof Fax.: 09131 / 50654-20 thing as a free Linux"

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.039 / U:10.764 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site