Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | From | (root) | Subject | Re: This is really Ridiculous (fwd) | Date | 27 Jul 1996 16:32:07 -0700 |
| |
In article <199607271648.MAA01207@gw1.matthews.com>, Paul Matthews wrote: >Jim Nance writes: > > Forwarded message: > > > From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@duracef.shout.net> > > > > > > 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.
Educated guess: The developers are introducing source errors in the code on purpose.
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |