Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 27 Mar 2001 17:17:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 27 Mar 2001 17:17:17 -0500 Received: from mta6.srv.hcvlny.cv.net ([167.206.5.17]:37508 "EHLO mta6.srv.hcvlny.cv.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 27 Mar 2001 17:16:58 -0500 Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 17:09:19 -0500 From: Alexander Valys Subject: Re: Kernel QA In-Reply-To: <20010327085142.A982@bessie.dyndns.org> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-id: <01032717091900.00406@athena> Organization: Valys Technology Solutions MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT In-Reply-To: <3AC04BAC.C21E302@konerding.com> <20010327085142.A982@bessie.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 27 March 2001 08:51, James Lewis Nance wrote: > Instead I think we need to encourage people who want to use Linux, > rather than develop it, to use kernels from a distribution. I hope that's not the opinion of all the kernel developers - where does that leave distributions like slackware, debian, and the rest that don't have the time or resources to modify the kernel themselves? Every kernel release that is meant to keep developers "in sync", as you say, should be a 2.4.x-prex release, and the stable releases should actually be stable. If this means slowing the release schedule, so be it. You are proposing to release unfinished, buggy and unstable code and let the distributions pick up your slack. It sounds like something Microsoft would do. - 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/