Re: starting with 2.7

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Mon, 2005-01-03 at 16:34 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 10:18:47AM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Sun, 2 Jan 2005, Andries Brouwer wrote:
> > 
> > >You change some stuff. The bad mistakes are discovered very soon.
> > >Some subtler things or some things that occur only in special
> > >configurations or under special conditions or just with
> > >very low probability may not be noticed until much later.
> > 
> > Some of these subtle bugs are only discovered a year
> > after the distribution with some particular kernel has
> > been deployed - at which point the kernel has moved on
> > so far that the fix the distro does might no longer
> > apply (even in concept) to the upstream kernel...
> > 
> > This is especially true when you are talking about really
> > big database servers and bugs that take weeks or months
> > to trigger.
> 
> If at this time 2.8 was already released, the 2.8 kernel available at 
> this time will be roughly what 2.6 would have been under the current 
> development model, and 2.6 will be a rock stable kernel.


as long as more things get fixed than new bugs introduced (and that
still seems to be the case) things only improve in 2.6. 

The joint approach also has major advantages, even for quality:
All testing happens on the same codebase. 
Previously, the testing focus was split between the stable and unstable
branch, to the detriment of *both*.


-
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/