Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261909AbVCCQTj (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:19:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261755AbVCCQTi (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:19:38 -0500 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:38564 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261927AbVCCQTS (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:19:18 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 08:19:01 -0800 From: Chris Wright To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Andrew Morton , greg@kroah.com, torvalds@osdl.org, rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering Message-ID: <20050303161901.GO28536@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> References: <42265023.20804@pobox.com> <20050303002047.GA10434@kroah.com> <20050303081958.GA29524@kroah.com> <4226CCFE.2090506@pobox.com> <20050303090106.GC29955@kroah.com> <4226D655.2040902@pobox.com> <20050303021506.137ce222.akpm@osdl.org> <4226EE0F.1050405@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4226EE0F.1050405@pobox.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1459 Lines: 35 * Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@pobox.com) wrote: > 1) There is no clear, CONSISTENT point where "bugfixes only" begins. > Right now, it could be -rc2, -rc3, -rc4... who knows. > > We need to send a clear signal to users "this is when you can really > start hammering it." A signal that does not change from release to > release. A signal that does not require intimate knowledge of the > kernel devel process. > > This is a key reason why we don't get more pre-release testing. > > 2) After 2.6.11 release is out, there is no established process for "oh > shit, 2.6.11 users will really want that fixed." > > -------------------- > > Linus's even/odd proposal is an example of a solution for problem #2, as > is my 2.6.X.Y proposal. > > The 2.4.x series -pre/-rc is an example of a solution for problem #1. This is exactly how I see it as well. Guess we drank the same koolaid ;-) I don't see the reluctance to use -pre/-rc since that's already what we're doing (just poorly encoded in -rc$x). Also, .x.y does require some release discipline, there may be cases where the .x.y fix should be much simpler than .x+1-pre/rc fix (as in Greg's comment that fixes may include basic API changes). thanks, -chris - 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/