From: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl
To: torvalds@transmeta.com, viro@math.psu.edu
Cc: adilger@clusterfs.com, akpm@zip.com.au,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, spyro@armlinux.org
Subject: Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre...
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 16:25:08 +0200 (MEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <UTC200204211425.g3LEP8Q25419.aeb@smtp.cwi.nl> (raw)
> FWIW, I doubt that dropping -pre completely in favour of dayly snapshots
> is a good idea - "2.5.N-preM oopses when ..." is preferable to
> "snapshot YY/MM/DD oopses when..." simply because it's easier to match
> bug reports that way.
: Dailies (nice) would need some distinguishing feature in EXTRAVERSION,
: please. "-20Apr02" would suit.
= Well, hopefully it will be "-pre020420" so that increasing kernel
= versions can be sorted... Also, skip releasing snapshots on days
= when no new deltas have been applied...
In the good old days we had frequent releases.
For example, the 1.3 series went from 1.3.1 to 1.3.100
in eleven months, an average of one patch every three days.
These days we have pre-patches (15 since Feb 1), and patches
(5 since Feb 1) showing an average of one patch every four days.
So, maybe there is a small slow-down, or maybe the testintervals
were chosen unfortunately.
If it is possible to increase the fequency with which patches are
released, then that is very good. There is no need to invent new
numbering schemes. Indeed, I would be in favour of collapsing
the present scheme (for 2.5), and call everything patch-2.5.N,
no reason to panic when N reaches into the hundreds.
The reason I object to "-20Apr02" or "-pre020420" is that it
makes it difficult to see whether there are missing patches
in a given archive. Sequential numbering is better.
(Moreover, there might be two patches on one day, there is a
handful of examples already.)
Concerning the collapsing of patches and prepatches:
For a stable series like 2.4 one needs pre-patches to have a
test-period. For an unstable series like 2.5 pre-patches only
cause a small amount of hassle (the naming is different, they
live in different directories, the patches are not incremental,
incremental patches again have a different naming scheme)
and as far as I can see the presumed advantage, namely that the
result of a patch is more stable than that of a pre-patch, is
absent so far in the 2.5 series. Maybe prepatches should first
be reinvented again shortly before the release of 2.6.
Andries
next reply other threads:[~2002-04-21 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 125+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-04-21 14:25 Andries.Brouwer [this message]
[not found] <mailman.1019594711.6915.linux-kernel2news@redhat.com>
2002-04-24 0:37 ` Pete Zaitcev
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-04-23 0:35 Chris Adams
2002-04-22 17:45 Petr Vandrovec
2002-04-22 18:19 ` Ian Molton
2002-04-22 18:20 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-04-22 18:31 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-04-22 19:40 ` Roman Zippel
2002-04-22 19:44 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 3:46 [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree Ian Molton
2002-04-21 4:05 ` BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre Alexander Viro
2002-04-21 1:53 ` Rob Landley
2002-04-21 18:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-04-21 23:08 ` Pavel Machek
2002-04-24 2:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-04-21 3:59 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-21 4:32 ` Andrew Morton
2002-04-21 5:59 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-04-21 4:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-04-21 12:53 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 15:44 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 15:50 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 16:10 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 16:21 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 17:17 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 17:34 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 17:38 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 17:49 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 17:53 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 18:09 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 19:53 ` Doug Ledford
2002-04-21 20:29 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 20:53 ` Doug Ledford
2002-04-21 21:05 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 21:21 ` Doug Ledford
2002-04-21 21:37 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 21:45 ` Alexander Viro
2002-04-22 22:49 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-22 22:08 ` Doug Ledford
2002-04-22 22:25 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-22 21:25 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-22 21:30 ` Doug Ledford
2002-04-22 21:33 ` Nicholas Harring
2002-04-25 20:53 ` Kai Henningsen
2002-04-21 23:16 ` Pavel Machek
2002-04-23 20:45 ` Rik van Riel
2002-04-25 3:51 ` Ian Molton
2002-04-25 3:55 ` Olivier Galibert
2002-04-25 12:38 ` Ian Molton
2002-04-25 13:33 ` David Woodhouse
2002-04-25 14:29 ` Richard Gooch
2002-04-25 15:41 ` Rik van Riel
2002-04-22 17:31 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-27 18:59 ` Richard Gooch
2002-04-26 20:19 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-28 17:42 ` Richard Gooch
2002-04-26 20:38 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-28 17:52 ` Richard Gooch
2002-04-27 20:02 ` Roman Zippel
2002-04-28 17:40 ` Richard Gooch
2002-04-28 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-04-28 18:47 ` Richard Gooch
2002-04-28 19:07 ` Kiss The Blade
2002-04-28 19:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-04-28 19:41 ` Richard Gooch
2002-04-28 19:49 ` Kiss The Blade
2002-04-28 19:42 ` Richard Gooch
2002-04-28 20:03 ` tomas szepe
2002-04-28 20:11 ` Roman Zippel
2002-04-28 20:40 ` Kiss The Blade
2002-04-29 6:55 ` Kai Henningsen
2002-04-29 6:55 ` Kai Henningsen
2002-04-28 20:06 ` Roman Zippel
2002-04-27 20:40 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-22 17:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 17:17 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 17:19 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 17:37 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 17:46 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-22 17:21 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 17:44 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 17:48 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 18:03 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 17:52 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 18:05 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 20:18 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 20:42 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 20:57 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 21:06 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 20:57 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-04-22 18:01 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-04-21 18:16 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 18:29 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-04-21 18:47 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 19:41 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-04-23 4:57 ` Andre Pang
2002-04-22 11:34 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-23 5:56 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-04-21 4:31 ` Ian Molton
2002-04-21 4:20 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-21 4:42 ` Ian Molton
2002-04-21 4:29 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-21 4:49 ` Ben Greear
2002-04-21 6:27 ` Alexander Viro
2002-04-21 11:18 ` Ian Molton
2002-04-21 16:28 ` dean gaudet
2002-04-21 12:57 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-21 4:40 ` Skip Ford
2002-04-21 8:31 ` Russell King
2002-04-21 13:05 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 13:08 ` Russell King
2002-04-21 20:53 ` Skip Ford
2002-04-21 16:35 ` dean gaudet
2002-04-21 17:13 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 17:23 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 17:32 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 17:39 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 17:45 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 17:47 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 17:49 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 17:57 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 18:07 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 18:14 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-21 18:24 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-04-21 18:26 ` Larry McVoy
2002-04-22 6:33 ` Rusty Russell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=UTC200204211425.g3LEP8Q25419.aeb@smtp.cwi.nl \
--to=andries.brouwer@cwi.nl \
--cc=adilger@clusterfs.com \
--cc=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=spyro@armlinux.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
--cc=viro@math.psu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®