Message-ID: <4958D86D.2000506@davidnewall.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:32:21 +1030
From: David Newall <davidn@davidnewall.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
CC: Igor Podlesny <for.poige+linux@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Hi! I've noticed that kernel.org advertises 2.6.28 as "The	latest
 stable version of the Linux kernel is".
References: <43d009740812282139x7597aafbn4474455c1aa1e0e8@mail.gmail.com> <20081229092124.GA18987@infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <20081229092124.GA18987@infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 906
Lines: 18

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> instead of these rants bug reports would be more useful.

Igor didn't rant, not even a little bit, and it reflects poorly on you
that you engage in hyperbole rather than hear his story.  In fact, or at
least in my opinion as a computer programmer with 30 years experience,
he's right: A newly stable kernel is not stable.  He might even be right
about regressions since 2.6.24.

It's a sorry day when somebody making a simple, reasonable and accurate
feedback is criticised for not providing bug reports.  But don't let him
(or me) stop you guys from toasting your fine success.  You believe it's
stable; what more could anyone want?
--
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/