Re: 2.6.19 -mm merge plans

Bill Davidsen
2006-09-22T00:59:21Z

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> I think it would help if you went back to using meaningful names for
>> releases, because 2.6.19-test1 is pretty clearly a test release even
>> to people who can't figure out if a number is odd or even. Then after
>> people stop reporting show stoppers, change to rc numbers, where rc
>> versions are actually candidates for release without known major bugs.
>
>
> Actually, considering our group of developers, I think "-rc" has been
> remarkably successful at staying on the "bug fixes only" theme.
>
Perhaps I misread what Linus said, the issue I was suggesting be
addressed was one of clarity to the testers, not the developers. The
releases identified as test would be for evaluation, while the ones
identified as rc would really be candidates with no "fix before next
version" bugs known. I would think that between test releases some bugs
could be fixed, but new features could be added. That would encourage
more active testing without overly slowing the development process.

Having used that for a long time for 2.2 and 2.4 I think there's quite a
track record of that nomenclature being clear to the users.

--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
Obscure bug of 2004: BASH BUFFER OVERFLOW - if bash is being run by a
normal user and is setuid root, with the "vi" line edit mode selected,
and the character set is "big5," an off-by-one errors occurs during
wildcard (glob) expansion.