Re: 2.6.19 -mm merge plans

[Nick Piggin]

Ingo Molnar wrote:

> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> > I think the "big merges in the first two weeks, and a -rc1 after, and 
> > no new code after that" rule has been working because it brought 
> > everybody in on the same page.
>
> yeah. I dont really support the even/odd release thing because even the 
> old 1.2/1.3/2.0/2.1/2.2/2.3/2.4 scheme _always_ confused non-insiders. 
> Sometimes i saw it confuse people who already understood the GPL ;-) 
> Furthermore it would just dillute our version numbers to encode some 
> information that "-rc1" indicates just as well. Insiders know perfectly 
> well that when -rc1 is released the merge window is closed. And what 
> causes -rc elongation is usually not the lack of communication towards 
> users or lack of testing but the lack of fixing power ...

OTOH, if we were worried about confusing people, we wouldn't be
using the acronym 'rc' for our 'Ridiculous Count', and have our rc1
denote the result of 2 weeks of stuffing the tree with new features
and intrusive changes, where people might mistake that for the much
more common RC-as-in-'Release Candidate'. :)

Our -rc is what everyone else knows as -pre, and our dot zeros
basically correspond to what people think of as a release candidate.
As a developer it doesn't hurt me and I do like the current system,
but in principle I just dislike things that are more confusing than
they could be.

--

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
-
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/