Re: Development tree, PLEASE?

[Bernd Petrovitsch]

On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 01:57 -0700, Michael Loftis wrote:
> --On January 21, 2006 11:51:28 PM +0100 Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@xxxxxxxxx> 
> wrote:
> 
> > And the more the development head proceeds from the "stable" one, the
> > more work is it to "backport" some hardware driver IMHO. Especially if
> > "stability" is a primary concern.
> 
> Yes, I realise all of this.  But everyone seems to get this damned 
> territorial attitude that I want to see kernel development stopped, quite 

Not at all.

> the opposite.  All I want to see is a stable target for certain windows of 
> time.  So that way when bugs are fixed that are trivial there's a place to 

You already have it - with the old and with the new development model.
*Your* problem is that the window of time with the new model is too
short IYHO.

> go without upgrading scads of userland stuff or worrying about lots of 
> unrelated change.

Yes, we all know *your* problem and you want dozens of people to work a
lot *only* for you and for free.
Other solutions to *your* problem can be found in other mails in this
thread.

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services



-
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/