|From:||Greg KH <greg-AT-kroah.com>|
|To:||Linus Torvalds <torvalds-AT-osdl.org>|
|Subject:||Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering|
|Date:||Thu, 3 Mar 2005 08:43:53 -0800|
|Cc:||Jeff Garzik <jgarzik-AT-pobox.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem-AT-davemloft.net>, akpm-AT-osdl.org, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.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. > > Anybody? 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. thanks, greg k-h
Copyright © 2005, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds