From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267191AbUGVUCb (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:02:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267193AbUGVUCb (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:02:31 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:39358 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267191AbUGVUC2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:02:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:01:12 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Adrian Bunk Cc: corbet@lwn.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: New dev model (was [PATCH] delete devfs) Message-Id: <20040722160112.177fc07f.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20040722193337.GE19329@fs.tum.de> References: <40FEEEBC.7080104@quark.didntduck.org> <20040721231123.13423.qmail@lwn.net> <20040721235228.GZ14733@fs.tum.de> <20040722025539.5d35c4cb.akpm@osdl.org> <20040722193337.GE19329@fs.tum.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.4 (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 Adrian Bunk wrote: > > my personal opinon is that this new development model isn't a good > idea from the point of view of users: > > There's much worth in having a very stable kernel. Many people use for > different reasons self-compiled ftp.kernel.org kernels. Well. We'll see. 2.6 is becoming stabler, despite the fact that we're adding features. I wouldn't be averse to releasing a 2.6.20.1 which is purely stability fixes against 2.6.20 if there is demand for it. Anyone who really cares about stability of kernel.org kernels won't be deploying 2.6.20 within a few weeks of its release anyway, so by the time they doodle over to kernel.org they'll find 2.6.20.2 or whatever.