Re: Linux 2.6.9-rc1

[Bill Davidsen]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Matt Mackall wrote:
>
> > Phew, I was worried about that. Can I get a ruling on how you intend
> > to handle a x.y.z.1 to x.y.z.2 transition? I've got a tool that I'm
> > looking to unbreak. My preference would be for all x.y.z.n patches to
> > be relative to x.y.z.
>
>
> Hmm.. I have no strong preferences. There _is_ obviously a well-defined 
> ordering from x.y.z.1 -> x.y.z.2 (unlike the -rcX releases that don't have 
> any ordering wrt the bugfixes), so either interdiffs or whole new full 
> diffs are totally "logical". We just have to chose one way or the other, 
> and I don't actually much care.
>
> Any reason for your preference? 

It should work like a bk, so two kinds of logic aren't needed.

--
   -bill davidsen (davidsen@xxxxxxx)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
 last possible moment - but no longer"  -me
-
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/