lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: New dev model (was [PATCH] delete devfs)
    From
    Date
    Ben Hoskings <ben@jeeves.gotdns.org> writes:

    > I think the idea of forking off certain releases in the 2.6.x.0 form, to only
    > recieve bugfixes and security updates, is a very good idea. A couple of
    > points against it were raised above, but I think if it were approached the
    > right way, they wouldn't be issues.

    I think so.

    I assume the numbering will stay the same, i.e.
    VERSION = 2
    PATCHLEVEL = 6
    SUBLEVEL = 8
    EXTRAVERSION =-rc2

    will eventually become
    VERSION = 2
    PATCHLEVEL = 6
    SUBLEVEL = 8
    EXTRAVERSION =

    and then possibly

    VERSION = 2
    PATCHLEVEL = 6
    SUBLEVEL = 8
    EXTRAVERSION =.1 (or -pl1 etc.)

    so it won't require changing scripts.

    > IMO the process wouldn't mirror the old 2.x / 2.y model because it is much
    > more fine-grained. With the old model, changes have to be backported to a
    > kernel that is significantly older, and which potentially has seen
    > fundamental changes in the releases between (i mean between 2.x -> 2.y).

    I think so. The scheme is somehow similar to -AC (Alan Cox') tree -
    and we all know that it (the process etc) was working very well.
    --
    Krzysztof Halasa
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:4.058 / U:0.048 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site