Re: Linux 2.6.9-rc1

[Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Matt Mackall wrote:
> 
>>Phew, I was worried about that. Can I get a ruling on how you intend
>>to handle a x.y.z.1 to x.y.z.2 transition? I've got a tool that I'm
>>looking to unbreak. My preference would be for all x.y.z.n patches to
>>be relative to x.y.z.
> 
> 
> Hmm.. I have no strong preferences. There _is_ obviously a well-defined 
> ordering from x.y.z.1 -> x.y.z.2 (unlike the -rcX releases that don't have 
> any ordering wrt the bugfixes), so either interdiffs or whole new full 
> diffs are totally "logical". We just have to chose one way or the other, 
> and I don't actually much care.
> 
> Any reason for your preference? 

It should work like a bk, so two kinds of logic aren't needed.

-- 
    -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
  last possible moment - but no longer"  -me