|| ||Greg KH <greg-AT-kroah.com>|
|| ||Linus Torvalds <torvalds-AT-osdl.org>|
|| ||Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering|
|| ||Thu, 3 Mar 2005 08:43:53 -0800|
|| ||Jeff Garzik <jgarzik-AT-pobox.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem-AT-davemloft.net>, akpm-AT-osdl.org,
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 08:23:39AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So what's the problem with this approach? It would seem to make everybody
> happy: it would reduce my load, it would give people the alternate "2.6.x
> base kernel plus fixes only" parallell track, and it would _not_ have the
> testability issue (because I think a lot of people would be happy to test
> that tree, and if it was always based on the last 2.6.x release, there
> would be no issues.
Well, I'm one person who has said that this would be a very tough
problem to solve. And hey, I like tough problems, so I'll volunteer to
start this. If I burn out, I'll take the responsibility of finding
someone else to take it over.
I really like the rules you've outlined, that makes it almost possible
to achieve sanity.
to post comments)