Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Jan 2005 19:24:52 -0500 | From | Theodore Ts'o <> | Subject | Re: starting with 2.7 |
| |
On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:59:27PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > 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. > > 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 was thinking more about every week or two (ok, two releases in a day like we used to do in the 2.3 days was probably too freequent :-), but sure, even going to a once-a-month release cycle would be better than the current 3 months between 2.6.x releases.
- Ted - 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/
| |