From: Vitaly Luban <Vitaly@Luban.org>
To: Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com>
Cc: "François Cami" <stilgar2k@wanadoo.fr>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Kernel Releases
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:13:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C03D7E2.66A892F2@Luban.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C03CC6C.DD03CDDE@kegel.com> <3C03CF2A.5070307@wanadoo.fr> <3C03CFA7.3E824AE7@kegel.com>
Dan Kegel wrote:
> François Cami wrote:
> >
> > Dan Kegel wrote:
> >
> > > 2.4.x should continue to use -preY.
> > > There's no need for a -rcY as some have suggested.
> > > All we need to do to avoid messes like the 2.4.15 debacle
> > > is to insist that a 2.4.X-preY should not be
> > > released as final 2.4.X until the pre's been out for a week,
> > > and there should never be any changes introduced into a final
> > > that didn't cook for a week as a pre.
> >
> > I don't see the difference between a -rc that has cooked for a week,
> > and a -pre that has cooked for a week, except that -rc sounds more
> > like "this is *maybe* the next stable kernel", whereas -pre still
> > sounds "beta".
>
> The difference between "this is *maybe* the next stable kernel"
> and "just another beta" is very slippery. I don't object
> to the -rc idea, but I don't think it's as valuable as all that.
>
IMHO, -rc is just one extra unnecessary entity and may bring
only some confusion to newbies & extra work for maintaner.
Cheers,
Vitaly.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-11-27 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-11-27 17:25 Kernel Releases Dan Kegel
2001-11-27 17:36 ` François Cami
2001-11-27 17:38 ` Dan Kegel
2001-11-27 18:13 ` Vitaly Luban [this message]
2001-11-28 16:23 ` Horst von Brand
2001-11-28 19:17 ` Mike Fedyk
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111261807570.489-100000@mikeg.weiden.de>
2001-11-27 18:08 ` vda
2001-11-27 16:58 ` Mike Galbraith
[not found] <fa.dac7a7v.1hkofg8@ifi.uio.no>
2001-11-27 17:53 ` Giacomo Catenazzi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-11-26 10:46 Martin Knoblauch
2001-11-26 15:27 ` John Jasen
2001-11-26 20:36 ` Horst von Brand
2001-11-27 2:40 ` Gerhard Mack
2001-11-25 5:37 Dan Kegel
2001-11-25 9:25 ` Nathan Dabney
2001-11-25 10:24 ` Keith Owens
2001-11-25 13:34 ` Phil Howard
2001-11-25 19:03 ` Nathan Dabney
2001-11-25 4:27 David Relson
2001-11-25 5:49 ` John Alvord
2001-11-25 6:34 ` CaT
2001-11-25 14:12 ` John Jasen
2001-11-26 7:15 ` John Alvord
2001-11-25 15:46 ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-11-25 16:23 ` Nathan Walp
2001-11-26 21:03 ` Bill Davidsen
2001-11-25 19:55 ` Phil Sorber
2001-11-26 9:22 ` Allan Sandfeld
2001-11-26 14:51 ` Ian Stirling
2001-11-26 15:02 ` Rik van Riel
2001-11-26 19:11 ` Ian Stirling
2001-11-26 19:55 ` vda
2001-11-26 20:42 ` Bill Davidsen
2001-11-27 4:21 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-11-27 9:50 ` Helge Hafting
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3C03D7E2.66A892F2@Luban.org \
--to=vitaly@luban.org \
--cc=dank@kegel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stilgar2k@wanadoo.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.