Re: Re: Please tag tested releases of the 2.4.x kernel

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@ns.caldera.de>]

[It would be nice f you could teach your mailer about replies..]

Hi Justin,

In article <20011201113734.5187E38329@fever.semiotek.com> you wrote:
> And the kernels on kernel.org *are* tested, by lots of people, by kernel 
> developers, by lots of ordinary folks even. I bet right after theren's 
> an announce on slashdot you see lots of traffic on the ftp/http sites.

The problem is that there is absoloutly no defined QA-cycle for these
kernels. Please take a look at what distributors (at least most, I know
at least one counter-example):

 o they freeze at one public kernel release
 o they do testing, lots of testing
 o they apply bugfixes for problems found in their debugging
   or coming in new releases _only_.  No new major changes that
   might break things.

That's why new distribution releases tend to come with 'old-looking'
kernels.

With kernel.org release _any_ new release mixes features, rewrites and
bugfixes.  I hope this will change a little for 2.4 now that Marcelo
who does the above cycle for for Conectiva takes over maintainership.
But in can't in whole - noone would really freeze the stable series
as strict as distributors do.

	Christoph

-- 
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.