From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 01:57:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 01:57:03 -0500 Received: from sd.skjellin.com ([194.19.28.170]:16402 "HELO sd.skjellin.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 01:56:53 -0500 From: "Andre Tomt" To: Subject: RE: Change of policy for future 2.2 driver submissions Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 07:57:06 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: <002201c076c7$76cab720$8d19b018@c779218a> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I was in your position, I feel it may be a mistake. > I personaly do not trust the 2.4.x kernel entirely yet, and would > prefer to > wait for 2.4.1 or 2.4.2 before upgrading from 2.2.18 to ensure last-minute > wrinkles have been completely ironed out, and I know there are people who > share my viewpoint, and would rather use 2.2.XX for a while yet, and I'm > afraid that this may partialy criple 2.2 driver development. I would wait for at least 2.4.10 on production systems (servers in particular). Not to start a flame or anything (yeah, right), but 2.2.x was not usable on such systems before it reached 2.2.16 IMHO. So, I guess, the "crippling" of driver submissions could hurt me bit, in theory, which I don't like. ;-) -- André. Alfred? http://www.tomt.net - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/