Re: Suggestion About Kernel Releases

[Oliver Pinter]

On 5/21/08, Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After long discussions about kernel release methodology, an idea has
> came to ( Any comments welcomed :-) ) my mind :
>
> -  2 weeks of merge window for each "rc" releases should remain the same .
> - When decided the 2.6.xx-rcx is ready to become 2.6.xx, it should be
> 2.6.xx-test1 instead of 2.6.xx
> - Chris Wright (or whoever will handle these "testX" maintaining) can
> maintain these "testX" releases as like 2.6.x.y maintaining.
> - After releasing the "testX" releases, the new kernel release process
> should start.
> - When Chris decided it is stable enough, it should release as 2.6.xx
> (stable).
> - Of course, 2.6.x.y releases follows then as usually.
>
> Please share your opinions. Thanks :-)
>
> Tarkan
> --
> 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/
>

now:
linux-2.6.x -> linux-2.6.(x+1)-rcY -> linux-2.6.(x+1)
         \->2.6.x.y
       \->2.6.(x+1).y
                  \->2.6.x.(y+1)-rc1->2.6.x.(.y+1)
           \->2.6.x.(y+1)-rc1->2.6.x.(.y+1)

your idea:
linux-2.6.x -> linux-2.6.(x+1)-rcY -> linux-2.6.(x+1)
         \->2.6.x.y
       \->2.6.(x+1).y
                  \->2.6.x.(y+1)-test1->2.6.x.(.y+1)
             \->2.6.x.(y+1)-test1->2.6.(x+1).(.y+1)

only the namig is was other, rc -> test,

-- 
Thanks,
Oliver
--
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/