> The _real_ solution is to make fewer fundamental changes between
> stable kernels, and that's a real solution that I expect to become
> more and more realistic as the kernel stabilizes.
Agreed, this would make a _lot_ of difference in the time it
takes to get a new stable kernel really stable.
> But you also have to realize that "fewer fundamental changes" is a
> mark of a system that isn't evolving as quickly, and that is reaching
> middle age. We are probably not quite there yet ;)
Doesn't mean we need to get _all_ our TODO items done in
2.5. I really don't see what's wrong with doing only a
few in 2.5 and delaying the rest for 2.7, especially not
when both 2.5 and 2.7 happen quickly ;)
regards,
Rik
-- Shortwave goes a long way: irc.starchat.net #swlhttp://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/