> Coudln't the "incomplete or experiemental" sections of 2.2.x kernels
> already be considered Beta? I mean, I think the beta channel already
> exists in the current versioning system.
>
> brian
>
That is good for identifying which parts of the linux kernel are beta
( or alpha quality). I am talking about a stamp of approval
from the kernel developers for the overall kernel. Right
now there are only 2 labels -- Development and Stable. I am
taking about refining it a bit more-- development, beta and
stable. At least with the 2.2 series, I think distribution makers
(Redhat, Suse, and possibly others) jumped in too early. At
the risk of sounding bureaucratic, let me suggest a scheme.
I think we should wait for x days ( a week, 10 days pick
your choice) before a beta version is declared stable.
Of course, you can argue that users can a set a rule for
themselves. It just make the life of users a little easier
if the software itself gives more information about its quality.
Ramana
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/