Re: Linux 2.6.21

Linus Torvalds wrote:

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
There is a conflict between Linus trying to release kernels every
2 months and releasing with few regressions.

No.

Regressions _increase_ with longer release cycles. They don't get fewer.

The fact is, we have a -stable series for a reason.

Problem is, not enough developers pay attention to the -stable
series. Adrian, maybe you could shift your attention there and
stop trying to track the bleeding edge?

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain kernel version
    ... Adrian Bunk stusta.de> writes: ... Some performance regressions aren't easily noticeable without benchmarks... ... I think that publishing statistics about kernel patches downloads would ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Linux 2.6.21
    ... On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote: ... They get frustrated because they focussed on developing new features ... to help with the regressions anyway. ... Bugs get _found_ faster thanks to a release ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: [Bug #10641] [BUG] 2.6.26-rc1-git4 - task blocked on powerpc for more than 120 secon
    ... On Sunday, 11 of May 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote: ... The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions ... Thanks for letting me know, I've updated the bug entry to reflect this (well, ... Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Linux 2.6.21
    ... On 30/04/07, Adrian Bunk wrote: ... >> And it failed because many regressions still stayed unfixed and some ... have done much better with fixing the known regressions, ... kernel (and people who did test -rc7 and would most likely also have ...
    (Linux-Kernel)