Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Some thoughts about stable kernel development | From | Krzysztof Halasa <> | Date | 12 Nov 2003 16:01:20 +0100 |
| |
Willy Tarreau <willy@w.ods.org> writes:
> - maintaining two trees is always more work than only one tree for the > same person, whatever the changes. This is obviously true, otherwise > none of us would ask for someone else to maintain the stable tree :-) > I believe this reason was given by both Alan and Marcelo at different > times.
Sure. However, with this scenario, the amount of additional work would be low, as the time-consuming things are done once for both trees.
> - I think it was Linus who said that clueless people will only use distro's > kernels, therefore are not affected by how the kernel is developped. And > for other people like us, the "stable" kernel will never contain enough > features and we will have to patch anyway.
Not sure about it - while I'm using 2.6.0test on my notebook (my personal news/mail server + less important things), I also use official kernels on some machines and patched trees on other ones. What I _don't_ use is distribution kernel - not because it's bad, but rather because i don't know it good enough.
> - someone else (alan ?) said that even most obvious fixes can break some > setups, so there are not many "obviously riskless" patches around, and > if there's a really critical one which needs to go mainstream very > quickly, > then the maintainer can always release a new version in a hurry and delay > -preX pending features for the next release.
-post, yes. But it only solves this one problem. -- Krzysztof Halasa, B*FH - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |