Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 09 Nov 2003 20:06:14 +0100 | From | Stefan Smietanowski <> | Subject | Re: Some thoughts about stable kernel development |
| |
Hi Krysztof.
> As all of you know, the development cycle can be shortened by using > two separate trees for a stable kernel line. > > Say, we're now at 2.4.23-rc1 stage. This "rc" kernel would also be > known as 2.4.24-pre1. The maintainer would apply "rc"-class fixes to > both kernels, and other patches (which can't go to "rc" kernel) would > be applied to 2.4.24-pre1 only. > > After 2.4.23-rcX becomes final 2.4.23, the 2.4.24-preX would become > 2.4.24-rc1 and would be a base for 2.4.25-pre1.
And then someone comes along and says that feature X isn't working in some version. He then reports that "it worked in a.b.c but then someone broke it for a.b.c+1 pre 1. Then you have to tell that person that a.b.c+1 pre 1 isn't newer than a.b.c. Messy. Very messy. The list gets too many mails that are answered by "RTFM" already.
// Stefan
- 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/
| |