Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:44:08 +0100 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: Enough with the ad-hoc naming schemes, please |
| |
On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 11:38:07AM -0700, cliff white wrote: > On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 13:08:51 -0500 > Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> wrote: > > > Dear Linus, > > > > I can't help but notice you've broken all the tools that rely on a > > stable naming scheme TWICE in the span of LESS THAN ONE POINT RELEASE. > > > > In both cases, this could have been avoided by using Marcello's 2.4 > > naming scheme. It's very simple: when you think something is "final", > > you call it a "release candidate" and tag it "-rcX". If it works out, > > you rename it _unmodified_ and everyone can trust that it hasn't > > broken again in the interval. If it's not "final" and you're accepting > > more than bugfixes, you call it a "pre-release" and tag it "-pre". > > Then developers and testers and automated tools all know what to > > expect. > > Speaking for OSDL's automated testing team, we second this motion.
<aol>me too</aol> I've already made some representations to Linus in private, and now I'm actively queueing up patches which have been sitting around since the start of -rc1. I, for one, no longer believe in any naming scheme associated with mainline.
-- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/ 2.6 Serial core - 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/
| |