Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S1751405AbWIUSAS@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751405AbWIUSAS (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:00:18 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751409AbWIUSAS
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:00:18 -0400
Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:28896 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751405AbWIUSAP (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:00:15 -0400
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:59:59 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.19 -mm merge plans
Message-Id: <20060921105959.a55efb5f.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609210819170.4388@g5.osdl.org>
References: <20060920135438.d7dd362b.akpm@osdl.org>
	<45121382.1090403@garzik.org>
	<20060920220744.0427539d.akpm@osdl.org>
	<1158830206.11109.84.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0609210819170.4388@g5.osdl.org>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.6; i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1912
Lines: 49

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 08:25:55 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Alan Cox wrote:
> > 
> > A suggestion from the department of evil ideas: Call even cycles
> > development odd ones stabilizing. Nothing gets into an odd one without a
> > review and linux-kernel signoff/ack ?
> 
> I don't think that's an evil idea, and in fact we've discussed it before. 
> I personally like it - right now we tend to have that "interminable series 
> of -rc<n>" (where <n> is 3..) before release, and I'd almost personally 
> prefer to just have a rule that is more along the lines of
> 
>  - 2.6.<odd> is "the big initial merges with all the obvious fixes to make 
>    it all work" (ie roughly the current -rc2 or perhaps -rc3).
> 
>  - 2.6.<even> is "no big merges, just careful fixes" (ie the current "real 
>    release")
> 
> Each would be ~3 weeks, leaving us with effectively the same real release 
> schedule, just a naming change.
> 
> That said, I think Andrew was of the opinion that it doesn't really _fix_ 
> anything, and he may well be right. What's the point of the odd release, 
> if the weekly snapshots after that are supposed to be strictly better than 
> it anyway?
> 
> So I think I may like it just because it _seems_ to combine the good 
> features of both the old naming scheme and the current one, but I suspect 
> Andrew may be right in that it doesn't _really_ change anything, deep 
> down.
> 

Again, before we can implement anything we should describe what problem we are
actually trying to solve here.

Jeff: "I want faster release cycles because <no reason given>"

Me: "I want less bugs"

Anyone else?
-
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/