Re: A users thoughts on the new dev. model

From: Adrian Bunk
Date: Fri Jul 23 2004 - 16:41:56 EST


On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 01:58:27PM +0000, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Followup to: <cdpee5$otu$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> By author: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > I confess I feel that this new model is a return to the bad old days
> > when the stable tree wasn't. Sounds as if Andrew is bored with the idea
> > of letting 2.7 be the development tree and just being the gatekeeper of
> > STABLE new features for 2.6. Perhaps 2.7 should be opened and Andrew
> > will have a place to play, and features can drift to 2.6 more slowly.
> >
>
> I think the discussion we had at the kernel summit has been somewhat
> misrepresented by LWN et al. What we discussed was really more of a
> "soft fork", with the -mm tree serving the purpose of 2.7, rather than
> a hard fork with a separate maintainer and putting ourselves in
> back/forward-porting hell all over again.
>
> Note that Andrew's -mm tree *specificially* has infrastructure to keep
> changes apart and thus backporting to 2.6 mainstream of patches which
> have proven themselves becomes trivial.
>...

One problem from a user's point of view is that removal of obsolete code
that works sufficiently for some users.

Andrew said explicitely in a mail to linux-kernel that he'd consider
removing devfs "mid-2005" - and it didn't sound as if this would only be
a -mm "feature".

Even if 2.7 is started this doesn't has to imply that it has to be
flooded with big changes - a short 2.7 with relativley few invasive
changes might also be an option.

> -hpa

cu
Adrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/