Re: Linux 2.6.9-rc1

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 14:54, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Linus Torvalds:
> 
> > On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Matt Mackall wrote:
> >> 
> >> Phew, I was worried about that. Can I get a ruling on how you intend
> >> to handle a x.y.z.1 to x.y.z.2 transition? I've got a tool that I'm
> >> looking to unbreak. My preference would be for all x.y.z.n patches to
> >> be relative to x.y.z.
> >
> > Hmm.. I have no strong preferences. There _is_ obviously a well-defined 
> > ordering from x.y.z.1 -> x.y.z.2 (unlike the -rcX releases that don't have 
> > any ordering wrt the bugfixes), so either interdiffs or whole new full 
> > diffs are totally "logical". We just have to chose one way or the other, 
> > and I don't actually much care.
> 
> It would be slightly more consistent to diff .2 against .1 because
> this is what already happens when a new x.y.z release is published.

Yes, but the -rcX releases aren't done that way.  It's mostly how you
view things.  From a users point of view, do I want to download x.y.z
and apply patches .1 through .N?  Or do I want to download x.y.z and
apply 1 patch to get me to the x.y.z.N level?

Personally, I prefer the "one patch to rule them all" method. :)

josh

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/