--Jauder
On Sun, 18 Oct 1998, Alan Cox wrote:
> > In future it would be useful to adopt a policy to never accept changes for
> > 2.0 unless 2.1 has the equivalent bug fix/change
>
> Unfortunately this is completely impractical. 2.1.x is frequently not stable
> enough for some people to work on. Drivers are done 2.0.x first by most
> commercial oriented bodies and many users, all the network stack improvements
> for amateur radio where done 2.0.x first and ported into 2.1.x at the end
> of things after the updates had been available for 2.0.x for a year or so.
>
> I'm trying to keep 2.0.x change histories to avoid this kind of problem as well
> as the notes for each applied patch in .34/.35/.36. I've got 400 or so pieces
> of saved diffs and notes to hand from this
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/