Re: New (now current development process)

Russell King
2005-10-30T22:45:39Z

On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 02:31:03PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 11:12:41AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 12:29:28AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:
> > > > > > I don't think anybody has been really unhappy with this approach? Hmm?
> > > > >
> > > > > The long freeze periods were nothing much happens are painful. It
> > > > > would be better to have some more overlap of merging and stabilizing
> > > > > (stable does that already kind of, but not enough)
> > > >
> > > > Violently agree. I find the long freeze periods painful and very very
> > > > very boring, to the point of looking for other stuff to do (such as
> > > > cleaning up bits of the kernel and queuing mega-patches for the next
> > > > round of merging.)
> > >
> > > The freezes are for fixing bugs, especially recent regressions.
> >
> > Given my stated low activity during the -rc periods, well, you draw
> > your conclusion from that.
> >
> > > There's no shortage of them, you know.
> >
> > Please let me know when there's something in my area regresses.
> >
>
> a) you're sitting around feeling very very very bored while
>
> b) the kernel is in long freeze due to the lack of kernel developer
> attention to known bugs
>
> The solution seems fairly obvious to me?

That's fine if you have the hardware to be able to debug these issues.

--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core