Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering

Jeff Garzik
2005-03-03T09:32:20Z

Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 03:38:22AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
>>The pertinent question for a point release (2.6.X.Y) would simply be
>>"does a 2.6.11 user really need this fix?"
>
>
> "need this fix bad enough now, or can it wait until 2.6.12?"
>
>
>>>Like I previously said, I think we're doing a great job. The current
>>>-mm staging area could use some more testers to help weed out the real
>>>issues, and we could do "real" releases a bit faster than every 2 months
>>>or so. But other than that, we have adapted over the years to handle
>>>this extremely high rate of change in a pretty sane manner.
>>
>>I think Linus's "even/odd" proposal is an admission that 2.6.X releases
>>need some important fixes after it hits kernel.org.
>
>
> I agree.
>
>
>>Otherwise 2.6.X is simply a constantly indeterminent state.
>
>
> Heh, true, but all software is in that state :)
>
>
>>We need to serve users, not just make life easier for kernel developers ;-)
>
>
> Damm those pesky users. Without them our life would be so much
> easier...

hehe :)

I do honestly worry that sometimes we lose sight of what best serves our
users.

We need to not only produce a useful kernel, but also package it in a
way that is useful to the direct consumers of the kernel: distros
[large and small] and power users.

What do those direct consumers really want? What best serves them?

Jeff