On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, you wrote:
> It seems to be a lot harder than it should be to keep short development
> releases. I certainly haven't found the magic combination yet. 2.4.x is
> definitely all I hoped for (the big goal for me was to make sure that the
> mindcraft-like web-performance scalability problems would be gone, and we
> definitely fixed that), but it took much too long.
(The following is based on assumptions you may disagree with.
It is not meant to fan the flames.)
If the goal is to get shorter development cycles, why not just
announce, after six months, that the kernel is in feature freeze
and the next three months will only be used to shake down the
problems.
Certainly, the major disadvantage is that you'll have to release
with many fewer features. But the releases will happen much
faster.
So rather than waiting until everything seems to work well, just
announce a freeze, stick to it, and pull out anything that isn't
working. Accept that many features you *want* won't be there.
I don't think this would necessarily require the number of
significant additions to be reduced. If they work, they get to
stay in. If not, no big deal because the next release will
happen within a year.
-- Christopher Thompson http://hypocrite.org/ "John and Mary had never met. They were like two hummingbirds who had also never met."- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 15 2000 - 21:00:18 EST