> > So, in essence what you're saying is that you'd like (by proxy - I
note
> > that you're not offering to implement anything) to work against a
kernel
> > which isn't changing much.
> Yes, in effect I think I'm saying unit testing is easier against a
stable
> backdrop.
There is no reason why one cannot do initial development against a stable
kernel. However, once the patch works to the developer's satisfaction, it
is incumbent upon him to port it to the development series if patches
to it are being accepted or to wait for the next one.
For example, if a patch for a new or enhanced feature were developed
against 2.2.0 through 2.2.7, it would be necessary to wait for the
release of 2.2.8/2.3.1 so that the patch could be submitted against 2.3.1.
If the patch were developed against 2.2.8 through 2.2.11, it should have
been ported to 2.3.x for submission. With 2.2.12, it is now too late, as
Linus has declared a (long expected and arguably overdue) feature freeze
with 2.3.18, so any new features must wait for 2.5.1. So the right thing
to do with a feature patch such as the one you are advocating is to port
it to 2.3.18 and maintain it until 2.5.1 is released. Then submit it. In
the meantime, see if the maintainer of the relevent section of the kernel
will provide you feedback on it. Just don't expect it to be accepted until
2.5.1.
Of course, none of the above applies to bug fixes.
M Carling
-
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/