Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 09:19:03 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Eric Gaumer <gaumerel@ecs.fullerton.edu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
       "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, akpm@osdl.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering
Message-ID: <20050303171903.GA11560@kroah.com>
References: <20050302200214.3e4f0015.davem@davemloft.net> <42268F93.6060504@pobox.com> <4226969E.5020101@pobox.com> <20050302205826.523b9144.davem@davemloft.net> <4226C235.1070609@pobox.com> <20050303080459.GA29235@kroah.com> <4226CA7E.4090905@pobox.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0503030750420.25732@ppc970.osdl.org> <20050303164353.GE10761@kroah.com> <422743AB.9020403@ecs.fullerton.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <422743AB.9020403@ecs.fullerton.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1897
Lines: 50

On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 09:04:43AM -0800, Eric Gaumer wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 08:23:39AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >>So what's the problem with this approach? It would seem to make everybody
> >>happy: it would reduce my load, it would give people the alternate "2.6.x
> >>base kernel plus fixes only" parallell track, and it would _not_ have the
> >>testability issue (because I think a lot of people would be happy to test
> >>that tree, and if it was always based on the last 2.6.x release, there
> >>would be no issues.
> >>
> >>Anybody?
> >
> >
> >Well, I'm one person who has said that this would be a very tough
> >problem to solve.  And hey, I like tough problems, so I'll volunteer to
> >start this.  If I burn out, I'll take the responsibility of finding
> >someone else to take it over.
> >
> >I really like the rules you've outlined, that makes it almost possible
> >to achieve sanity.
> >
> 
> How does what Linus outlined differ from splitting to 2.7?

- Each 2.6.x.y series would be abandanded after the next 2.6.x release
  came out.
- There would be no big development fork.

Those are two ways this differs.
 
> All that aside... why not make the "sucker tree" a breeding ground for new 
> kernel hackers.

Have you looked into the kernel-janitor project?  That's the best
"breeding" ground around for people who want to learn the kernel
development process.  I highly recommend that.

I don't think this "stable/bugfix" release series would be a good place
for new hackers, as most first bugfixes are of the janitorial type,
which would not be accepted into such a release tree.

thanks,

greg k-h
-
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/