public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Allan Sandfeld <linux@sneulv.dk>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: What is standing in the way of opening the 2.5 tree?
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 12:28:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <E15xo7Q-000191-00@Princess> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1004219488.11749.19.camel@stomata.megapathdsl.net> <3BDB91D7.C7975C44@mandrakesoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <3BDB91D7.C7975C44@mandrakesoft.com>

On Sunday 28 October 2001 06:04, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Miles Lane wrote:
> > Dear Linus,
> >
> > It seems like there has been the expectation that the 2.5
> > tree was about to be opened for at least the last two months.
>
> Most likely we are
> (a) waiting for stuff to get merged from Alan's tree, and
> (b) waiting for new VM and blkdev stuff in Linus tree to settle down and
> prove itself stable
>
> Personally I am still fixing bugs (2.4 stuff) so I could care less :)

Basicly you could restate it like this:
2.5 will be when:
(a) Linus is satisfied with the patches from Alan's tree
(b) Alan is satisfied with the patches in Linux's tree. (Most notably VM 
stuff)

Since some of the stuff in Alan's tree is for special features/hardware, it 
might get droped when Alan gets the responsiblity for a truly stable kernel. 
So (b) is the most important condition.

The latest ac patch was getting smaller, watch for it for reach 0 :)

It might be an idea to consider a two or three tiered release model like 
debian. E.g. experimental/testing/stable.. Right now 2.2 is stable, 2.4 is 
testing closing to stable, but we lack an experimental branch, although Alan 
has taken some stable "experimental" stuff. A truly experimental 2.4 would 
nice even if the source incompatable changes was still postponed for 2.5. And 
offical post-patches for the stable releases could also be usefull, instead 
of people recomminding kernels from Redhat/Suse. Official post-patches would 
IMHO have saved 2.4.11 and 12.

Disclaimer: But releasemodels are religius questions and hard to argue or 
prove. :-)

regards
`Allan

  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-10-28 11:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-10-27 21:51 What is standing in the way of opening the 2.5 tree? Miles Lane
2001-10-28  5:04 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-10-28  5:46   ` David S. Miller
2001-10-29  1:58     ` Andreas Dilger
2001-10-30  5:09       ` What is standing in the way of opening the 2.5 tree? (quotas?) Neil Brown
2001-10-30 18:29       ` What is standing in the way of opening the 2.5 tree? Jan Kara
2001-10-30 23:03         ` Alan Cox
2001-10-31 13:19           ` Jan Kara
2001-10-28 11:28   ` Allan Sandfeld [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-10-30 21:11 Thomas Hood
2001-10-30 21:39 ` lost
2001-10-30 21:59   ` Sujal Shah
2001-10-31 19:18     ` Michael Peddemors
2001-10-31 19:39       ` David Lang
2001-10-30 22:44 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-31  1:36   ` Mike Fedyk

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=E15xo7Q-000191-00@Princess \
    --to=linux@sneulv.dk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox