Re: 2.0.31 : please!

Teunis Peters (teunis@usa.net)
Mon, 14 Jul 1997 14:22:20 -0600 (MDT)

> Does anyone have any clue what makes any of us hack on this thing at
> all? It's pretty simple, whats fun, interesting, and enjoyable to
> work on, that is what we're going to hack on. Straight forward. I
> happened to enjoy making a system solid, but not nearly as much as I
> enjoy designing and implementing the latest and greatest.
>
> But to hear someone go "HEY! That's not it, don't be sympathetic to
> the developers, whats wrong with you! We need a stable kernel so that
> we don't get ripped apart in the trade rags!", sorry that kills all my
> desire to work on it.
>
> I refuse to work on something in my spare time for people who berate
> me and my fellow developers.

All I can say is 'Cheers'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is an unbelievably project both in its complexity and in its stability.

I sure wish the pulps would grant us SOME leave of existance!
But they're still hurting from the winnings of microSloth with unstable
systems.

'sides we have 'RedHat', 'Caldera' and other commercial organizations to
cover for when commercial support is necessary. Why worry? They don't
(on the whole unless they don't research) use alpha or unstable
kernels.... and it's not like this project encourages end-users to
upgrade all the time. [there's warnings against it...]

So lets get back to kernel-hacking and away from developer-slapping!

Wind to your wings!
- Teunis

Though I am glad that the 'stable' series is still worked on... The
biggest problem with 1.2/1.3 was that the 1.3 series added so many
features that there was an absolute necessity for many people to adopt it.
[eg PCI, yes?].... This left the 'stable' kernel so far in the dust that
this also hurt Linux in 'the real world' (whatever that is :).