lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [kernel.org users] XZ Migration discussion
    Date
    Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> writes:

    > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:03:26AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
    >> > 3* Create a new subdirectory for every 2.6.x kernel, and move all the
    >> > related files there. This would shrink the main index drastically, and
    >> > each subdirectory would have a reasonable size (except maybe 2.6.16 and
    >> > 2.6.27.) Oddly enough this has been done for the files under testing/
    >> > already, so I am curious why we don't do it for the release files (and
    >> > the testing/incr/ files, while we're at it.)
    >>
    >> Well, part of the reason why is that we're functionally "stuck" on 2.6;
    >> a prefix which really has lost all meaning.
    >>
    >> It might open up the question if we shouldn't just do a Solaris and drop
    >> the leading 2 (so the next kernel would be 6.33) or call the kernel
    >> after that 3.0 instead of 2.6.34, and then 3.1 instead of 2.6.35.
    >
    > Damn, we forgot to have that fight at Kernel Summit last year.
    >
    > I'm in favour of the 3.0 / 3.1 / 3.2 with stable@ being responsible for
    > 3.0.1, 3.0.2, 3.1.1, etc.

    Like I suggested in October 2008, but it would have been more natural at
    that time:

    <http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122418454113793&w=2>
    --
    Hilsen Harald.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-02-14 15:51    [W:4.296 / U:0.084 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site