Re: linux-2.4.33 released

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>]

On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 12:18 +1000, Grant Coady wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 21:09:23 +0200, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> 
> >Hello,
> >
> >On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 07:43:00PM +0200, Kasper Sandberg wrote:
> >> On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 04:18 +0000, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >> > final:
> >> > 
> >> > - 2.4.33-rc3 was released as 2.4.33 with no changes.
> >> I have one suggestion for the 2.4 tree, next time a few changes is
> >> introduced, they could be put as a bugfix release, as with the 2.6
> >> branch now, so that it doesent end up taking years for a new 2.4
> >> release, and instead a point release(if any such thing happens at all)
> >
> >This has already the case with the hotfix tree since 18 months or so. A
> >hotfix release is issued when there are important fixes. Anyway, I was
> >thinking about releasing pre-releases more often. Also, you might have
> >noticed that the slowdown is more important during -rc for obvious reasons.
> 
> >To solve this problem, I intend to maintain a 'next' branch in the tree
> >which will contain the fixes that can wait for next version. It should
> >help us batch the fixes and reduce the latency between important fixes
> >and the associated release.
> 
> Perhaps time to follow the 2.6.nn-stable naming scheme?  Since you're in 
> the driver's seat now?  This may be less confusing to 2.4 series users.

Maybe a strange question.. but why bother?
The criteria for a patch going into 2.4 are already stricter than the
2.6 -stable criteria (in practice), so why not just release a new "full"
kernel instead when this is required/needed ?