lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: stable? quality assurance?
Date
On Sunday, July 11, 2010, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 04:51:42PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > I hope that someone answers who actually can take some critique. From the
> > current replies I perceive a lack of that ability.
>
> well, I'll try to do then :-)
>
> There were some threads in the past about kernel releases quality,
> where Linus explained why it could not be completely black or white.
>
> Among the things he explained, I remember that one of primary concern
> was the inability to slow down development. I mean, if he waits 2 more
> weeks for things to stabilize, then there will be two more weeks of
> crap^H^H^H^Hdevelopment merged in next merge window, so in fact this
> will just shift dates and not quality.
...
> It's not really advisable to call dot-0 releases "unstable" because
> it will only result in shifting the adoption point between the user
> classes above.

IMnshO it's not exactly fair to call them "stable" either. I tend to call them
"major releases" which basically reflects what they are - events in the
development process that each start a new merge window. Nothing more, either
way.

Rafael


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-07-11 23:43    [W:0.670 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site