Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262675AbUJ1ACy (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:02:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262538AbUJ0SpL (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:45:11 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71]:31137 "EHLO sj-iport-2.cisco.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262641AbUJ0Shj convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:37:39 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Hua Zhong" To: "'Alan Cox'" Cc: "'John Richard Moser'" , =?gb2312?B?J0VzcGVuIEZqZWxsduZyIE9sc2VuJw==?= , "'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" Subject: RE: My thoughts on the "new development model" Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:37:34 -0700 Organization: Cisco Systems Message-ID: <007101c4bc54$065ba2c0$103147ab@amer.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <1098890996.4302.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4939.300 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2374 Lines: 51 > On Maw, 2004-10-26 at 17:58, Hua Zhong wrote: > > The fact is, these days nobody wants to be a stable-release > >maintainer anymore. It's boring. > > That depends what kind of an engineer you are. Just as there > are people who love standards body work and compliance > testing/debugging there are people who care about stable trees. Absolutely agreed. There are folks around me who can do one thing much better than the other. When I said "nobody", I really meant "top kernel developers". I have not seen anyone step up and say "I'll volunteer to maintain a 2.6 stable release" hence the comment. This is actually not a problem caused by the new development model per se. The same thing might have happened with 2.4. You know what I'm talking about. Most talented people just like new challenges instead of maintaining old code. However, there are some things that make this situation worse by the new model. 1. No official stable releases and thus no official maintainers. 2.6 is no longer a stable release. 2.6.x might be. And Linus doesn't seem to plan to endorse anyone for this job. Previously, Linus could appoint someone and even if he is not really well-known, people would eventually accept him, but now it's not the case anymore. More importantly, if there is no official stable releases, whom do other people send bug fixes to? From both user and developer perspective, this is very hard to work out. 2. The new version scheme. Now a stable release has to be 2.6.x. So instead of being a 2.6 maintainer, you might be called a 2.6.x maintainer. One extra number, less importance and recognicion, and less motivation for volunteers to show up (especially for relatively new people). Just common psychology. :) These are just my observations. As far as I can see only two things will help: 1. Appoint an official 2.6 maintainer. Be it someone Linus appoints, or someone like Alan Cox who volunteers. :-) 2. This maintainer will not be stuck at only one 2.6.x version. Instead, he maintains 2.6.x for a while until it is stable enough, and then move up to 2.6.y (y>x), and start the stabilization again. Hua - 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/