Re: IEEE-1394 problem on init [ was Re: Linux 2.4.21-rc1 ]

• Next message: Jean Delvare: "Re: [PATCH 2.4] dmi_ident made public"
• Previous message: jlnance@unity.ncsu.edu: "Re: TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE & stack location"
• In reply to: Ben Collins: "Re: IEEE-1394 problem on init [ was Re: Linux 2.4.21-rc1 ]"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, 25 Apr 2003, Ben Collins wrote:

> > Yes, and I miss why that matters. Let me see if I can make the idea clear
> > to you:
> > 2.4.22-pre5 some code
> > 2.4.22-pre5-bk1 fixes
> > 2.4.22-pre5-bk2 more fixes
> > 2.4.22-pre5-bk3 still more fixes
> > 2.4.22-pre6 fixes to date plus major changes
> >
> > So when a maintainer got something major it wouldn't go into bk (the
> > commercial software database) until a new -pre, while the -bk patches
> > available for download would get the fixes only.
>
> What if a fix depends on a major-change-patch? What if a fix is itself a
> major change?

Time for a -pre. That's a change management decision. Hopefully -pre would
be somewhat closer spaced than has happened with 2.4.21.

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
-
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/

• Next message: Jean Delvare: "Re: [PATCH 2.4] dmi_ident made public"
• Previous message: jlnance@unity.ncsu.edu: "Re: TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE & stack location"
• In reply to: Ben Collins: "Re: IEEE-1394 problem on init [ was Re: Linux 2.4.21-rc1 ]"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 22:00:23 EST