> There are actually more stable versions available but they are not advertised

[Igor Podlesny]

2008/12/29 Ãric Piel <eric.piel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Igor Podlesny schreef:
>> Actually that's either a mistake or I don't know what you guys call "a
>> stable version".
> [removing all the part which needs bug report numbers]
>
> I agree with you that the website is not very clear for someone not
> accustomed to the Linux kernel development. There are actually more
> stable versions available but they are not advertised. Maybe there
> should be more trees displayed, something like this:
> The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is:       2.6.28
> The previous stable version of the Linux kernel is:     2.6.27.10
> The latest longtime version of the Linux kernel is:     2.6.16.62

	Well, I'd call those versions stable if there were ongoing bugfixes
(if affected) backporting to it. Otherwise these are rather "outdated"
versions.

-- 
End of message. Next message?
¢éì®&Þ~º&¶¬–+-±éÝ¥Šw®žË±Êâmébžìdz¹Þ)í…æèw*jg¬±¨¶‰šŽŠÝj/êäz¹ÞŠà2ŠÞ¨è­Ú&¢)ß«a¶Úþø®G«éh®æj:+v‰¨Šwè†Ù>Wš±êÞiÛaxPjØm¶ŸÿÃ-»+ƒùdš_