Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758001AbZJFPez (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 11:34:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932117AbZJFPew (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 11:34:52 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:35149 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757880AbZJFPev (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 11:34:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.32-rc3 From: Dirk Hohndel To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Len Brown , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <1254797502.14122.146.camel@dhohndel-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com> <1254839931.24117.9.camel@dhohndel-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Intel Open Source Technology Center Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:34:02 -0700 Message-Id: <1254843242.24117.23.camel@dhohndel-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 (2.26.3-1.fc11) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2782 Lines: 75 On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 08:13 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > > > > I respectfully disagree. > > .. because you don't know what the f*ck you're talking about. Always a pleasure having an intellectual discourse with you. > > With the proposed -rc0 there is EXACTLY ONE kernel that is called 2.6.31 > > - the release kernel. And everything else is called something > > 2.6.xx-rcY. > > No. > > That's simply not _true_. > > Think it through. Deeply. > > In particular, think about all the developers who start out at known > stable points. And they are _supposed_ to start at release points. It > means that a lot of versions in the -rc window will NOT have that -rc0 in > them. > > In fact, even more commonly (for people who don't rebase, which should be > the default), you'll have kernel versions in the merge window (and later) > that will have Makefiles that talk about the previous release. > > If you can't get that FUNDAMENTAL FACT, then I don't know what to say. The fundamental difference in our analysis is that I believe that 1% of the people using these kernels are developers as you describe above and 99% are people who pull from your tree and build and test. > > So if you see something that identifies itself as -rc0, you know it's > > from during the merge window. If you see something that calls itself > > 2.6.xx then you know it's a release kernel. > > No. No. And NO. For people simply pulling from your git tree, I think the answer is YES. > Your kind of magical thinking leads to _problems_. It's literally been a > problem that people stop bisecting, because they notice that they start > testing kernels that have a version number before the release they already > tested as good. Exactly because of your kind of linear thinking. I think those two things are entirely unrelated. How would calling the versions in the merge window -merge or -rc0 make any difference whatsoever in whether people are confused by git bisect behavior? > We need _less_ linear thinking, not more. And you need to start thinking > about other kernels than just my release tree. I do - I actually track multiple trees and have my own in which I do my own work. That still doesn't change my believe that the VAST MAJORITY of the people out there only track one tree. Yours. But hey, as you have stated so eloquently, I "don't know what the f*ck [I'm] talking about", so let's hear what others are thinking. /D -- Dirk Hohndel Intel Open Source Technology Center -- 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/