Kernel Planning (was 2.2 missing features)

Billy Harvey (Billy.Harvey@thrillseeker.net)
Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:34:34 -0400


Jauder Ho wrote:
>
> maybe there should be point releases of devel kernels (i.e. known mostly
> stable kernels that companies can port to with the knowledge that it's
> going to be relatively stable) this would be good as it makes a smaller
> delta to have to catch up with and requires you to store less info in your
> head :) for example, we determined that .29, .62, .86 and .106 were
> "good/stable" kernels and .125 is currently being tested to see if it is a
> good candidate for use.
>
> --Jauder

To one who can only occasionally peruse the kernel activity such as
myself, the long delay for this next release seems to have been as much
because we as a community don't attempt to define, at least publicly,
what particular features we want in the next release. While everyone is
always free to work on whatever piece of code he wants, a specific
target is always easier to aim at. One method of doing this is for
those who are closest to the kernel to make an estimate of how far we
can go is some time, say 1/3/6/12 months, and see which particular
projects have a decent chance of being completed by then. Having an
overall goal with general time frames gives the casual hacker an idea of
where he could do the most good on donating his time.

Billy

-- 
Billy.Harvey@thrillseeker.net

- 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/