On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 09:00:38PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > > > The other issue is that 2.6.14 is scheduled for release in the not so > > > > distant > > > > future, so we may skip uploading .13-3 to unstable and go for .14-1 > > > > directly, > > > > depending on status of newly introduced breakage in .14 and such. > > > > > > I vote for the later. > > > > Hehe, but this does suppose we create now another branch and start porting > > the > > patches and configs, i see nobody volunteering to do that. > > I vote for not creating another breach. I vote for moving to .14 > (or some -rc variant thereof). Its unlikelty to make much difference > on the initrd front and saves duplication of effort that is inherent > in the more branches approach.
Well, but are we really ready to lose the relative stability of the 2.6.13 packages now and redo all the patch triaging and config file fixing ? I am perosnally strongly in favour of going with 2.6.14-rc4 (in a 2.6.13.99-1 package), but we need at least to rework on the patches to do that. I will not be able to do that, except for powerpc, and i see nobody prepared to do it, unless you and waldi just volunteered to do this before monday :) Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
