850 changesets and 3383 revisions since 2.6.9 was released,
a little over 24 hours ago.
That's pretty impressive.
Jeff
Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> writes:
> 850 changesets and 3383 revisions since 2.6.9 was released,
> a little over 24 hours ago.
>
> That's pretty impressive.
It is, but I'm sure many of those changes were patches pending the
release before being committed.
--
M?ns Rullg?rd
[email protected]
How many changes occured between 2.6.8 & 2.6.9 ?
-matt
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 2:16 pm, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 850 changesets and 3383 revisions since 2.6.9 was released,
> a little over 24 hours ago.
>
> That's pretty impressive.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Matt Heler wrote:
> How many changes occured between 2.6.8 & 2.6.9 ?
'bk pull' says 4000 revisions to ChangeSet, for
15723 total revisions.
(these numbers include merge changesets, which inflate things)
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:37:59PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:16:00PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > 850 changesets and 3383 revisions since 2.6.9 was released,
> > a little over 24 hours ago.
> >
> > That's pretty impressive.
>
> Given a lot of these are backlogs from folks being
> conservative whilst we were in -rc, perhaps this is an
> indication we need shorter -rc periods ?
Actually, we need longer non-rc periods :)
Jeff
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:16:00PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> 850 changesets and 3383 revisions since 2.6.9 was released,
> a little over 24 hours ago.
>
> That's pretty impressive.
Given a lot of these are backlogs from folks being
conservative whilst we were in -rc, perhaps this is an
indication we need shorter -rc periods ?
Dave
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:39:32PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:37:59PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:16:00PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > >
> > > 850 changesets and 3383 revisions since 2.6.9 was released,
> > > a little over 24 hours ago.
> > >
> > > That's pretty impressive.
> >
> > Given a lot of these are backlogs from folks being
> > conservative whilst we were in -rc, perhaps this is an
> > indication we need shorter -rc periods ?
>
>
> Actually, we need longer non-rc periods :)
Personally, I think both of you are right. One major kernel release a
month seemed to be about the right rate. Maybe a week and a half of
non-rc plus two and a half weeks of -rc would be the right kind of
balance?
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/
2.6 Serial core
On Tue, Oct 19 2004, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:37:59PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:16:00PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > >
> > > 850 changesets and 3383 revisions since 2.6.9 was released,
> > > a little over 24 hours ago.
> > >
> > > That's pretty impressive.
> >
> > Given a lot of these are backlogs from folks being
> > conservative whilst we were in -rc, perhaps this is an
> > indication we need shorter -rc periods ?
>
>
> Actually, we need longer non-rc periods :)
Agree. The rate of change is truly impressive (thank you Andrew and
BK!), but personally I'd like to see things settle down a lot more
quickly. Instead of having 2-3 weeks of continual patch flood, a week or
submitting the stuff that was already done by 2.6.9 by Andrews inclusion
criteria (which I completely agree with) results in -rc1, followed by
2-3 weeks of of truly stabilizing bug fixing. Since by virtue of this
inclusion criteria development for a particular feature/change is
already done by 2.6.9 release, this should be easy [1].
[1] Yeah right, but at least we can try.
--
Jens Axboe
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:16:00PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> 850 changesets and 3383 revisions since 2.6.9 was released,
> a little over 24 hours ago.
>
> That's pretty impressive.
well, i've had stuff waiting for a few days for this
release to happen, so some of us where prepared ;-)
--
Ben ([email protected], http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
Hi!
> > > 850 changesets and 3383 revisions since 2.6.9 was released,
> > > a little over 24 hours ago.
> > >
> > > That's pretty impressive.
> >
> > Given a lot of these are backlogs from folks being
> > conservative whilst we were in -rc, perhaps this is an
> > indication we need shorter -rc periods ?
>
>
> Actually, we need longer non-rc periods :)
Or perhaps we need 2.7? It would probably make sense to keep 2.7
shorter than usual...
Pavel
--
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!