[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Some thoughts about stable kernel development
    > There is a problem that a development cycle (time between stable
    > = non-pre/rc versions) is long.

    This sentiment is expressed fairly often, and I have never seen it challenged.
    However, I am not convinced that it is true. I do not believe that people
    who care about stability want to upgrade to a new kernel with major changes
    in it every 9 months. It also takes a fairly long time for our "stable"
    kernels to actually get stable enough that vendors are comfortable shipping
    them. I think if our develpment cycle gets significantly shorter, you will
    end up with vendors skipping entire stable series (ie. moving from 2.2 to 2.6
    without ever doing 2.4). I think that would create more pain for us than our
    current release cycle length does.


    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 13:58    [W:0.022 / U:2.628 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site