>The current linux versioning scheme is very clever. It underscores
>the point that a software project never really completes. It only
>evolves.
Very true.
>This strategy has served us very well in the past, but I do think
>there is a need for a change. At present, the code evolves in
>two branches -- development (odd number) and stable (even number).
>I think we should at least split it into three branches --
>development, beta, and stable.
It allready is in 3 branches.
> Development --- kernel developers only
2.3.x
> Beta --- Adventorous users only
2.2.x-preY
> Stable -- No serious bug reported in the past x days
2.2.z
>Of course, we get into the problem of not getting enough users to
>pound on beta versions. But I think the number of linux users is large
>enough that bug reporting will not be a problem.
The kernel has allready done this for as long as I can remember.
Look in the "testing" directory of any mirror to get the "beta"'s
of as-yet-unreleased kernels. They exist for both stable and
devel kernels, so in fact there are 4 things going on.
>Ultimately it may be that users have to judge for themselves.
>But it would be nice if kernel developers can make the users
>job easier.
You haven't said anything that can't allready be done IMHO.
Perhaps you weren't aware of the 'pre' releases or where to get
them. We also have the 'ac' patches, as well as 'arca'
releases...
TTYL
-- Mike A. Harris Linux advocate GNU advocate Computer Consultant Open Source advocateTea, Earl Grey, Hot...
- 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/