Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Sat, 27 Jul 1996 12:48:09 -0400 | From | Paul Matthews <> | Subject | Re: This is really Ridiculous (fwd) |
| |
Jim Nance writes: > Forwarded message: > > From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@duracef.shout.net> > > > I think that some of the changes introduced since 2.0 were too big for a > > 2.0 release. > > > > I also think that the version numbering scheme is inadequate. When > > there are bug fixes applied to 2.0.N, the new version doesn't deserve to > > be 2.0.N+1 right away. It should be 2.0.N+1.beta for a few days first. > > How about this. We create a directory for the 2.1 kernel series. The first > thing we do in that directory is work out the bugs in current 2.0 kernels. > When we have one that is stable, we move it back as 2.0.11.
What a great idea! I am really getting frustrated by the continued problems. I don't mind working with pre-release software as long as I know that's what it is; I would really be grateful to the Linux Kernel guys if the new releases were tested a bit first.
Regards, -- Paul Matthews McLean, VA e-mail: paul@matthews.com
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |