On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >
> > Actually, they are already maintaining 2.6.x.y, (x => 11, 12, ...)
>
> I think the 2.6.x.y series is no longer maintained once 2.6.x+1 has
> been released for some time (surely after 2.6.x+2).
>
The same can still go for this, but instead of stopping at 2.6.x+2 we could
stop at 2.6.x+6 (or +5), and just not care about 2.6.x+[1-4]. But that
would be strong enough for those that would like the stable branch to
maintain it themselves. Currently it'l hard to pick a 2.6.x that you want
to stay with since the 2.6.x.y is stopped right after 2.6.x+1 is out. But
if not all 2.6.x has a .y, then that would focus more distrobutions or
whatever to pick the same one to support.
Oh well, I'm just spitting out a bunch of lip service here. It actually
seems interesting to try, and if I actually had a need to do this, I
would. But right now my focus is elsewhere.
Cheers,
-- Steve
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]