Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering

[Jeff Garzik]

Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 03:38:22AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> > The pertinent question for a point release (2.6.X.Y) would simply be 
> > "does a 2.6.11 user really need this fix?"
>
>
> "need this fix bad enough now, or can it wait until 2.6.12?"
>
>
> > > Like I previously said, I think we're doing a great job.  The current
> > > -mm staging area could use some more testers to help weed out the real
> > > issues, and we could do "real" releases a bit faster than every 2 months
> > > or so.  But other than that, we have adapted over the years to handle
> > > this extremely high rate of change in a pretty sane manner.
> >
> > I think Linus's "even/odd" proposal is an admission that 2.6.X releases 
> > need some important fixes after it hits kernel.org.
>
>
> I agree.
>
>
> > Otherwise 2.6.X is simply a constantly indeterminent state.
>
>
> Heh, true, but all software is in that state :)
>
>
> > We need to serve users, not just make life easier for kernel developers ;-)
>
>
> Damm those pesky users.  Without them our life would be so much
> easier...


hehe :)

I do honestly worry that sometimes we lose sight of what best serves our 
users.

We need to not only produce a useful kernel, but also package it in a 
way that is useful to the direct consumers of the kernel:  distros 
[large and small] and power users.

What do those direct consumers really want?  What best serves them?

	Jeff


-
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/