Bill Davidsen wrote:
I do think the old model was better; by holding down major changes for
six months or so after a new even release came out, people had a chance
to polich the stable release, and developers had time to recharge their
batteries so to speak, and to sit and think about what they wanted to
do, without feeling the pressure to write code and submit it right away.
Knowing that there's no place to send code for six months is a great aid
to generating GOOD code.
It never worked that way, which is why the model changed.
Like it or not, developers would only focus on one release. In the old
model, unstable things would get shoved into the stable kernel, because
people didn't want to wait six months. And for the unstable kernel, it
would often be so horribly broken that even developers couldn't use it
for development (think 2.5.x IDE).
Jeff
-
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]
