From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268581AbUHXXxT (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:53:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268540AbUHXXxS (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:53:18 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]:46221 "EHLO main.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268698AbUHXXue (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:50:34 -0400 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: fraga@abusar.org ( =?ISO-8859-1?Q?D=E2niel?= Fraga) Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.9-rc1 Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:46:04 +0000 (UTC) Organization: http://www.turbonerd.hpg.ig.com.br Message-ID: References: <20040824184245.GE5414@waste.org> Reply-To: fraga@abusar.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 200-207-206-233.dsl.telesp.net.br X-Newsreader: knews 1.0c.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article , Linus Torvalds writes: > Any reason for your preference? Linus, sorry but I can't agree with your decision. I'm not a developer, just an user and for me at least, there's no sense in supplying a patch related do 2.6.8 instead of 2.6.8.1. I always update my kernel when the official patch is announced and I'd expect to follow a well defined order (2.6.8 -> 2.6.8.1 -> 2.6.9...). Suppose we had 2.6.8.1, 2.6.8.2, 2.6.8.3 until 2.6.8.10. Should I remove 10 patches just to update to 2.6.9? For me it's a waste of time. I know you kernel developers use BK or some other method, but... Thanks. -- http://Processo.tk (1001 dias) http://U-br.tk Linux 2.6.7 São Paulo - SP