> Since the topic has come up, I thought I'd publish my wishlist
> for 2.3.0:
>
> (1) Fix all serious known bugs in 2.2.X before forking 2.3.0.
> (2) Fix serious bugs 2.2.X reported from the field before forking 2.3.0.
> (3) Write more documentation in the Documentation/ directory for things
> that commonly confuse people before forking 2.3.0.
> (4) Merge some more of the arch/ code back in before forking 2.3.0.
(5) Absorb non-intrusive patches that fix annoying but non-critical
bugs (from 2.2.5 onwards?).
> I won't mind if Linus allocates N months on 2.2.X fixes, stability
> is good, even if it's a grind to get there.
4 to 5 months should probably be enough. Until that time
the really bleeding edge people can probably survive on
loose patches that are floating around everywhere.
(like -ac, -arca, Richard's devfs, ReiserFS, dtfs, my
stuff once I get the time, etc...)
Rik -- If a Microsoft product fails, who do you sue?
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. riel@nl.linux.org |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.nl.linux.org/~riel |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
-
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/