Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Linux versioning scheme | Date | Wed, 23 Jun 1999 08:52:19 -0400 | From | Horst von Brand <> |
| |
CaT <cat@zip.com.au> said: > On Tue, Jun 22, 1999 at 02:28:49PM -0400, Ramana Juvvadi wrote:
[...]
> > This strategy has served us very well in the past, but I do think > > there is a need for a change. At present, the code evolves in > > two branches -- development (odd number) and stable (even number). > > I think we should at least split it into three branches -- > > development, beta, and stable. > > > > Development --- kernel developers only > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[...]
> Anyhow, AFAIK there ARE 3 branches. the 3rd is kinda shourtlived though:
???
I count at least half a dozen:
Stable (2.2) Beta (2.3) Alpha (testing)
Plus several other minor strands (Alan Cox', Andrea Arcangeli's, the SPARC stuff on CVS). And the patches floating around the 'net.
To try to shoehorn the source into N development strands won't work, it is contrary to the bazaar style, and (much worse!) means a lot of work sychronizing. Please, the man-hours of Our Fearless Leader and his minions are _way_ too precious to be wasted on such nonsense.
Unless you consider N is something like a couple thousand, one for each active developer ;-) -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |