| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Will Andrew Morton be the 2.6 Maintainer?Will Andrew Morton be the 2.6 Maintainer?Posted Apr 30, 2003 23:58 UTC (Wed) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359)In reply to: Will Andrew Morton be the 2.6 Maintainer? by coriordan Parent article: The 2.6.0 "must-fix" list Linus mentioned at linux.conf.au 2003 that Andrew was expected to be the 2.6 maintainer. I think there were un-resolved issues concerning his funding (or something like that) so it wasn't a definite thing, but Linus' seemed to imply that it was highly probable. He certainly seems to be acting the part already!!
(Log in to post comments)
Will Andrew Morton be the 2.6 Maintainer? Posted May 1, 2003 1:02 UTC (Thu) by alan (subscriber, #4018) [Link] I fully expect akpm to be the 2.6 maintainer. He's been assuming some of the responsibilities of the part way before now.Tail lkml for a while,.. he has one of the more solid understandings of how everything works now, he actively keeps up with change and a lot of new developments come through his mm tree, such as objrmap and other mm fixes, cfq and as IO schedulers, interactivity scheduler adjustments, ext3 developments like htree, the shared pagetables patch that probably won't make it in 2.6.0 was tried out in -mm, and a lot of ppc64, irq, and other bugfixes and errata come through the -mm tree. The -ac branch is mostly bugfixes and ports of old drivers to take advantage of the services in the new kernel. If this were FreeBSD, akpm would have my vote for core.
Will Andrew Morton be the 2.6 Maintainer? Posted May 1, 2003 1:03 UTC (Thu) by alan (subscriber, #4018) [Link] P.S: Before anyone asks, I am NOT alan cox.
|
|
||||||||||||