It would be great if on kernel.org there were a note indicating which
releases of the linux kernel had been favourably received.
If you could organize a bit you could even mark a release as "TESTED",
or even "APPROVED". All it would mean is that after it had been out for
a week or two nobody found any really serious problems.
"Really serious" would be something like it corrupts the filesystem, or
crashes a lot, or fails to build, or introduces a remote root exploit.
Releases like 2.4.14 (fails to build loopback) and 2.4.15 (corrupts)
would not be tagged as "APPROVED".
Also "APPROVED" or "TESTED" doesn't mean there are no issues or problems,
just that they're the usual kind of issues and problems, rather than
really serious issues.
I expect there to be quite a bit of human judgement involved in applying
the label. I'm not looking for a rigorous criteria--just the general
feeling of the community a week or two after the release was posted.
Justin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 30 2001 - 21:00:40 EST