> > Comments? the problem is that this doesn't tackle some of the fundamentals...
yes you have a step in between for extra stabilisation. However during that phase, the buildup of patch backlogs will keep going on, and the next "unstable" release is all the more so, because of all the enormous backlogs. Result the stabilisation takes longer. Which means the buildup next time is even bigger. And that may well be a cycle you can't get out of. Oh and most people will just start skipping the odd releases as well. Making this even worse. An alternative would be to instead of doing the alternating scheme, do higher frequency releases but with less new features per release. (like we had in early 2.6 days). Say 3 weeks of devel, 3 weeks of -rc and then release. Do it time driven so that stuff that gets found to be broken during -rc gets punted back (to -mm or so) for trying in a later release. (even when it was added before -rc; if the bug is found before -rc starts it has a chance for a fix, if it's during -rc it means "back out for next release"). This sounds harsh but as long as the "next chance" isn't that far in the future (three weeks at most before it is back) it shouldn't be a big deal. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
