From: Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@verizon.net>
Reply-To: gene.heskett@verizon.net
Organization: Organization: None, detectable by casual observers
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: starting with 2.7
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 17:50:30 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.7
Cc: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>, rol@as2917.net,
       "'Willy Tarreau'" <willy@w.ods.org>, "'Theodore Ts'o'" <tytso@mit.edu>,
       "'Horst von Brand'" <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl>,
       "'Thomas Graf'" <tgraf@suug.ch>, "'Adrian Bunk'" <bunk@stusta.de>,
       "'Diego Calleja'" <diegocg@teleline.es>, wli@holomorphy.com,
       aebr@win.tue.nl, solt2@dns.toxicfilms.tv
References: <20050104214324.GG22075@alpha.home.local> <200501061808.j06I84104393@tag.witbe.net> <41DDA8E1.8080406@tmr.com>
In-Reply-To: <41DDA8E1.8080406@tmr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200501061750.31052.gene.heskett@verizon.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2891
Lines: 68

On Thursday 06 January 2005 16:08, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>Paul Rolland wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>>>>In practice, that's all the -rc releases are these days
>>>
>>>anyway (there
>>>
>>>>are times when a 2.6.x-rcy release is more stable than 2.6.z). 
>>>> The problem is that since the -rc releases are called what they
>>>> are called, they don't get enough testing.
>>>
>>>Perfectly true. I would add that with -rc releases, people
>>>only upgrade when
>>>we tell them that they can, while with more frequent
>>>releases, they upgrade
>>>when they *need* to, and can try several versions if the
>>>first one they pick
>>>does not work.
>>
>> I'd like to add some personal view : After 2.4.x, we have had a
>> fork and 2.5.x was born, clearly identified as a development tree,
>> so no stability guaranteed... Then one day came 2.6.0, and so
>> on...
>> I'm sorry, but I still cannot consider 2.6.x being any stable the
>> way 2.4.x is today.
>>
>> Theodore wrote :
>>>that at least 1 in 3 releases will turn out to be stable enough
>>> for most purposes.  But we won't know until after 2 or 3 days
>>> which releases will be the good ones.
>>
>> I mostly agree. When a new 2.4.x comes out, I have a confident
>> feeling about it, and there is no reason for me to wait 2 or 3
>> days to know if it's stable or not. It's part of a stable branch,
>> and there are no major changes in it.
>> 2.6.x, I still consider as a development branch. OK, people
>> changed the numbering from 2.5.x to 2.6.x, but the number of
>> changes still going on didn't really change. Just have a look at
>> the numbers : patches are even bigger now that we are in a
>> "stable" branch (4Mo average for 2.6 patch, gzip when we had a 1Mo
>> average for 2.5 !)
>
>I think you are quoting MB/release where MB/month would be much
> closer. Part of the "new development model" is that Linus only
> releases a new version the Thursday after the racoons tip over his
> garbage can.

Izzat what triggers it?   Maybe we should all spend our nights coon 
hunting.  Thats an old boys game that can be lucrative at times.  I 
know one kid back in Nebraska that stuck them in the freezer till the 
price got good, and when he cleaned out the freezer, bought himself  
new Dodge Hemihead Charger for a high school graduation present.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.31% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
-
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/