Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:32:50 -0700 (PDT) | From | david@lang ... | Subject | Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0 |
| |
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jun 22 2007 00:29, Jesper Juhl wrote: >> On 21/06/07, Zoltán HUBERT <zoltan.hubert@zzaero.com> wrote: >> [snip] >>> All people who might read this know that traditionally >>> stable releases are even numbered and development branches >>> are odd numbered. This changed during late develoment of >>> 2.6, according to my analysis because of the "invention" of >>> GIT which was itself necessary because of BitKeeper (insert >>> ooooooooold flame-wars here) and which allowed very dynamic >>> develoment. >> [...] >> I myself have argued that we should be focusing more on stability and >> regression fixing, but I'm not so sure that a 2.6.7 devel branch would >> solve this. In general the 2.6.x.y -stable kernels seem to be doing >> the job pretty good. > > For my part, I think the 2.6.<odd> did not go as well as the 2.6.<even>, > beginning with x=16.
you misunderstood the even/odd it was never 2.x.y with y odd/even being stable / development, it was the x being even/odd to indicate stable / development.
all 2.6.x are stable, all 2.5.x were development.
David Lang | |