Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932201AbVLDMHW (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Dec 2005 07:07:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932205AbVLDMHW (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Dec 2005 07:07:22 -0500 Received: from krusty.dt.E-Technik.uni-dortmund.de ([129.217.163.1]:31154 "EHLO mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932201AbVLDMHV (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Dec 2005 07:07:21 -0500 Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 13:07:15 +0100 From: Matthias Andree To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC: Starting a stable kernel series off the 2.6 kernel Message-ID: <20051204120715.GB15577@merlin.emma.line.org> Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20051203222731.GC25722@merlin.emma.line.org> <200512040106.jB415cqb023723@pincoya.inf.utfsm.cl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200512040106.jB415cqb023723@pincoya.inf.utfsm.cl> X-PGP-Key: http://home.pages.de/~mandree/keys/GPGKEY.asc User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1912 Lines: 49 On Sat, 03 Dec 2005, Horst von Brand wrote: > Matthias Andree wrote: > > On Sat, 03 Dec 2005, David Ranson wrote: > > > Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > > > >- support for ipfwadm and ipchains was removed during 2.6 > > > > Surely this one had loads of notice though? I was using iptables with > > > 2.4 kernels. > > Sure had. They were scheduled for removal in march, 2005 a long time ago. > > > So was I. And now what? ipfwadm and ipchains should have been removed > > from 2.6.0 if 2.6.0 was not to support these. > > Or in 2.6.10, or 2.6.27, or whatever. No. If you need to remove major components, it is only diligent to bump the minor revision and call the beast 2.7.0. At that time, not only one or two subsystems, but all that were marked deprecated for 6 months or so, should be dropped. > > This doesn't matter. A kernel that calls itself stable CAN NOT remove > > features unless they had been critically broken from the beginning. And > > this level of breakage is a moot point, so removal is not justified. > > devfs was broken, and very little used. OK. This however doesn't hold for ipfwadm (which should probably never have made it into 2.6.0 in the first place) or ipchains. > > Linux 2.6 is not "stable" in this regard. > > Right. The idea of "stable series" had to go. And went. So what is the point in using Linux anyhow if the kernel developers don't care for the outside world, one might ask? What is in the way of reflecting feature removals in the minor version of the project, say, remove devfs, ipfwadm, ipchains and whatnot in one go and call the new release without this legacies 2.7.0? -- Matthias Andree - 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/