Subject: Re: RFC: Starting a stable kernel series off the 2.6 kernel
From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
Cc: Ben Collins <bcollins@ubuntu.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20051203193538.GM31395@stusta.de>
References: <20051203135608.GJ31395@stusta.de>
	 <1133620264.2171.14.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20051203193538.GM31395@stusta.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 14:57:11 -0500
Message-Id: <1133639835.16836.24.camel@mindpipe>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1173
Lines: 26

On Sat, 2005-12-03 at 20:35 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> 
> But yes, what I suggest is partially a step back in a way that it 
> doesn't conflict with the current 2.6.17+ development model.
> 
> Well, if taking the best from the old style development is improving 
> things that isn't something bad. 

You seem to be saying that the current development model is unacceptable
for users for whom older kernel work just fine, and the main risk in
upgrading is regression.  But the new development model is clearly
needed for those users whose needs are not met by the old kernel, say
due to unacceptable soft RT performance or unsupported hardware.

But it's wrong to try to evenly balance the needs of these two classes
of users, because the first class has another option - they can stick
with the old kernel that works for them.  The second class of users has
no other option, so their needs should be given greater weight.

Lee

-
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/