From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S276338AbRI1WEw>; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 18:04:52 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S276331AbRI1WEn>; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 18:04:43 -0400
Received: from gw-yyz.somanetworks.com ([216.126.67.39]:39562 "EHLO
	somanetworks.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S276340AbRI1WEb>;
	Fri, 28 Sep 2001 18:04:31 -0400
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 18:04:52 -0400
From: Mark Frazer <mark@somanetworks.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernel changes
Message-ID: <20010928180452.A6093@somanetworks.com>
In-Reply-To: <20010928143205.B3669@md5.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <20010928143205.B3669@md5.ca>; from pavel@md5.ca on Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 02:32:05PM -0700
Organization: Detectable, well, not really
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

The answer is to treat all linus/ac/aa/... kernels as development
kernels.  Don't treat anything as stable until it's been through
a real QA cycle.  I've heard Suse, RedHat and the like don't do a
bad job at this.