Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:07:31 -0800 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: starting with 2.7 |
| |
On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 01:36:21PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: >> This is the model that we used with the >> 2.3.x series, where the time between releases was often quite short. >> That worked fairly well, but we stopped doing it when the introduction >> of BitKeeper eliminated the developer synch-up problem. But perhaps >> we've gone too far between 2.6.x releases, and should shorten the time >> in order to force more testing.
On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:59:27PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > It is also the model we used until OLS this year - there was a 2.6 > release about once a month prior to OLS. Post OLS, it's now once > every three months or there abouts, which, IMO is far too long. > I really liked the way pre-OLS 2.6 was working... it means I don't > have to twiddle my fingers getting completely bored waiting for the > next 2.6 release to happen. Can we return to that methodology please?
Seconded.
-- wli - 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/
| |