Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0
- From: Al Boldi <a1426z@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 01:32:04 +0300
Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 04:53:58PM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
Al Viro wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 11:18:36AM +0200, Zolt?n HUBERT wrote:
And as I understand it, this is (was ?) the whole point of
stable/development kernels. "We" can trust a newer stable
kernel to be a drop-in replacement for an older stable
kernel (from the same series), while development kernels
need time to stabilise with the new whizz-bang-pfouit stuff
that you all so nicely add.
"Drop-in" in which sense? That out-of-tree modules keep working?
Not really...
Al, be reasonable. There are many out-of-tree GPL modules that won't be
accepted into mainline, never mind those that shouldn't be accepted.
But these modules do have a right to not be obsoleted by constant API
changes.
"have a right" are strong words.
Who is granting them this right?
Good-will GPL style.
You are effectively inhibiting the development of an out-of-tree GPL
module pool, by constantly pulling the rug under that community.
Do you think this is fair?
Why are these modules not submitted for inclusion into the kernel?
There are many reasons for this, but basically they are too under-developed
to be included, and need more time to mature out-of-tree.
Thanks!
--
Al
-
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/
- References:
- Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0
- From: Al Boldi
- Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0
- From: Adrian Bunk
- Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0
- Prev by Date: Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC] fsblock
- Previous by thread: Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0
- Next by thread: Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|