>> > The well-defined resync points are the 2.5.N releases. If -pre goes away,
>> > then the dot-releases might need to come a little closer together, that's all.
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>> I've told myself that I shouldn't have done "-preX" releases at all in
>> 2.5.x - the "real" numbers have become diluted by them, and I suspect the
>> -pre's are really just because I got used to making them during the
>> over-long 2.4.x time.
>
> I believe -pre's are still important. Daily snapshots are too likely to be
> broken, and "real" releases are different from -pre ones (with *usefull*
> difference): you can ignore -pre release, but you can't ignore real release
> (because real releases are relative to each other).
Pavel, I think it is an delusion. In practical terms we have
a string of -pre and traditional releases which differ really
little in terms of reliability. I number of 2.5.x without -pre
fail to compile different non-core modules. 2.5.9 hangs on boot
on my machine, while -preX worked.
Marcelo pays more attention to stabilizing suffixless releases,
and as well he should. However, I do not see how this can
be meaningfuly done in 2.5.x. I am not going to shed any tears
over the demise of -pre in unstable series, provided that
releases get spaced tighter, with smaller patch size between them.
-- Pete
-
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 : Tue Apr 23 2002 - 22:00:37 EST