[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: The naming wars continue...
Nick Piggin wrote:

> Linus I agree it isn't a huge issue. The main thing for me is that
> I could just give a _real_ release candidate more testing - run it
> through some regression tests, make sure it functions OK on all my
> computers, etc. I expect this would be helpful for people with large
> sets of regression tests, and maybe those maintaining 'other'
> architectures too.
> I understand there's always "one more" patch to go in, but now that
> we're doing this stable-development system, I think a week or two
> weeks or even three weeks to stabalize the release with only
> really-real-bugfixes can't be such a bad thing.
> 2.6.x-rc (rc for Ridiculous Count) can then be our development
> releases, and 2.6.x-rc (rc for Release Candidate) are then closer
> to stable releases (in terms of getting patches in).
> Optionally, you could change Ridiculous Count to PRErelease to avoid
> confusion :)
> Other than that I don't have much to complain about... so keep up the
> good work!

I do agree that the pre and rc names gave a strong hint that (-pre) new
features would be considered or (-rc) it's worth doing more serious
testing. If Linux doesn't like this any more, perhaps some other way to
indicate the same thing would be desirable. I admit that the kernel has
gotten so good that I only try -rc (by whatever name) kernel, I'm not
waiting for the next big thing. I think that's really good, actually.

-bill davidsen (
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me
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 14:07    [W:0.180 / U:5.904 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site