From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267349AbUGVW6R (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2004 18:58:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267351AbUGVW6R (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2004 18:58:17 -0400 Received: from mtvcafw.sgi.com ([192.48.171.6]:59214 "EHLO omx2.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267349AbUGVW6P (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2004 18:58:15 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 15:57:59 -0700 From: Paul Jackson To: Evan Hisey Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: A users thoughts on the new dev. model Message-Id: <20040722155759.0299dbc7.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <40FFD760.8060504@unix.eng.ua.edu> References: <40FFD760.8060504@unix.eng.ua.edu> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.10claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; 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 Evan, Have you found (1) Linus' 2.6 bk tree to meet your needs over the last few months? Or (2) has it been too unstable for you? If (1), seems like you might be in good shape, as from what I can gather of this (not being in Ottawa) next month looks alot like last month, so far as how Linux is developed. If (2), then perhaps there is an opportunity here for a derivative of Linus' tree that is "stabilized a bit", but not overly patched like certain vendor kernels I won't name. Yes, we'd all like the head kernel to march to the beat of our particular needs, rapidly changing and adding what we need without delay, leaving the rest untouched, and never breaking. Now ... back to reality ... -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.650.933.1373