In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Merrony, Stephen (London) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>The 2.2.X series is supposed to be stable. If Linus feels unable to release
>control of this kernel to Alan & Co. then surely this kernel should not have
>been released.
Ehh..
I haven't even opened 2.3.x, and people worry?
Sure, I could have released 2.2.0, and said "ok, it's off my hands, now
somebody else can do the maintenance thing". That's not how these
things work, though. It's not how 2.0.x worked, and it's not how it's
_supposed_ to work.
What happens is that for a few months after releasing a stable kernel, I
track that stable kernel to make sure everything is on track. After
that, I open up the development kernel.
It used to be that I had to maintain the stable kernel forever, and for
1.2.x, for example, I ended up doing pretty much every single stable
release (1.2.15, if I remember correctly, was done by other people, but
that was essentially already at the point where few people cared that
much any more).
These days, I'm happy to say, there are people who are not only able,
but accepted and even _expected_ by the community to take over the
stable development tree. So if Alan is going to be sucker enough to say
yes once more, he'll certainly get saddled with 2.2.x development,
probably within a month or two. But I don't want to leave behind me
something that isn't ready.
Linus
-
Linux SMP list: FIRST see FAQ at http://www.irisa.fr/prive/mentre/smp-faq/
To Unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe linux-smp" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
