lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectThinking about Linux 4.0...
"4.0, you say?"  Well, the idea is to get people thinking about things 
which otherwise they might not suggest because they're just too outlandish.

With the embracing of this new development model, we will speed up Linux
microevolution. New features which are consistent with the philosophy
of 2.6 will be accepted more readily. But there will now be some added
resistance against, shall we say, punctuations in the equillibrium.
That is, revolutionary new ideas which break things or affect the
philosophy of the kernel in a very fundamental way will be shunned. The
reason this is a problem is because, I expect, 2.6 will live longer as
the bleeding edge than those that came before.

It might be interesting to see people discuss advances to the Linux
kernel which, if interesting enough, would force a meaningful push into
2.7. And also interesting would be discussion of ideas that would be
good for the kernel to have but which are too radical for 2.6.

Also, if you have an idea in reserve which you think would not work for
2.6, you might be wrong. It might be that some radical ideas could be
made to fit.


Here's an example (probably a bad one): Lots of discussion has been
going on about reducing latency. Many of the ideas just patch over the
latencies, rather than, say, making it impossible to have latency
problems. Is there room in the future of Linux to have a driver model
which is much more real-time in nature?

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.025 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site