On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 19:29 +0000, Alistair John Strachan wrote: > On Thursday 10 November 2005 15:10, Mark Lord wrote: > [snip] > > But things just got WAY more complicated for most users of ipw2200. > > Sure, they can ignore us and just continue to run their old vendor > > kernels. But this means they don't get up-to-date kernels with > > bug fixes and security fixes. And more importantly to LKML, > > we've now just cut off a potentially large crowd of kernel-testers. > > > > Ugh. Ugly. > > I completely agree with this assessment, I was merely defending the "linux > development process" which I do not believe to be at fault here. It isn't, this started as a mail from someone, and was continued because ipw* and ieee* things was mentioned. I really hope that a newer version is merged... It can be branded experimental and all... =) -- Ian Kumlien <pomac () vapor ! com> -- http://pomac.netswarm.net
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- Re: New Linux Development Model
- From: Ian Kumlien <[email protected]>
- Re: New Linux Development Model
- From: Alistair John Strachan <[email protected]>
- Re: New Linux Development Model
- From: Mark Lord <[email protected]>
- Re: New Linux Development Model
- From: Alistair John Strachan <[email protected]>
- Re: New Linux Development Model
- Prev by Date: Re: [ANNOUNCE] GIT 0.99.9g
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 01/15] mm: poison struct page for ptlock
- Previous by thread: Re: New Linux Development Model
- Next by thread: Re: New Linux Development Model
- Index(es):
 |