Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 11:26:04 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org,
       marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: Some thoughts about stable kernel development
Message-Id: <20031109112604.613d385d.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <m3u15de669.fsf@defiant.pm.waw.pl>
References: <m3u15de669.fsf@defiant.pm.waw.pl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 887
Lines: 19

Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl> wrote:
>
> There is a problem that a development cycle (time between stable
>  = non-pre/rc versions) is long. Imagine a situation when we are at
>  some pre-3 stage, the kernel tree is full of problems which must be
>  resolved before the final release, and some serious security-class
>  bug has been found.

Well yes.  Two days after 2.4.20 was released we discovered a
data-corrupting bug in ext3.  I had no means of delivering a fix for that
apart from sticking a bunch of patches on my web page and making a lot of
noise about it.

So there is a case for a "2.4.20-post1" release to address such things.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/