Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 02:27:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 02:27:08 -0500 Received: from adsl-64-166-241-227.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net ([64.166.241.227]:10513 "EHLO www.hockin.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 02:26:58 -0500 From: Tim Hockin Message-Id: <200112010703.fB1731403709@www.hockin.org> Subject: Re: Coding style - a non-issue To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 23:03:01 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] 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 At 09:43 PM 11/30/01 -0800, Stephen Satchell wrote: > Most of the bad-but-not-obviously-bad ideas get rooted out by people trying > them and finding them to be wanting. Take, for example, the VM flap in the > Ahh right, like the OOM killer. There's a brilliant idea that got rooted out to where it belongs... > The "Linux Way" as I understand it is to release early and release > often. That means that we go through a "generation" of released code every And disregard the "mutations" that have already been "selected for" (to carry the analogy) in other systems. And disregard any edge-case that is "too hard" or "too rare" or "involves serious testing". > Now that I've stretched the analogy as far as I care to, I will stop > now. Please consider the life-cycle of the kernel when thinking about what > Linus said. I can't consider joe.random developer adding a feature as a "mutation". It's just not analogous in my mind. - 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/