Message-ID: <42278B3C.5030307@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:10:04 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040922
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: hzhong@cisco.com
CC: "'Linus Torvalds'" <torvalds@osdl.org>, "'Greg KH'" <greg@kroah.com>,
       "'David S. Miller'" <davem@davemloft.net>, akpm@osdl.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering
References: <200503032156.AWY71165@mira-sjc5-e.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <200503032156.AWY71165@mira-sjc5-e.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1273
Lines: 29

Hua Zhong wrote:
> The reason that I think it's important for some other person to do this job
> independently is that you are not bothered by bugfixes, which you never did
> well. :) You move on to each release as you do today, with different
> criteria, and someone else who can do the job better do so to stablize it.
> 
> In the end it's more like the old way of 2.5/2.4, but just with a shorter
> release cycle, and the "2.6 stable release maintainer" could also continue
> to pick up new 2.6.x releases to work on instead of having to be stuck on
> one tree for 2 years or ever. He can say "this is the last 2.6.12.x release
> and next I'll start 2.6.16.1", etc.
> 
> For this to happen the person has to be well-recognized and trusted by the
> community. Alan is one of the best candidates. :) Of course, I'm not sure if
> he is still interested..


I think the system we appear to have wound up with is superior:  there 
is no single 2.6.X.Y maintainer, but more a $sucker mail alias that Does 
The Right Thing.

	Jeff


-
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/