From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262160AbVADV70 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:59:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262378AbVADV4Z (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:56:25 -0500 Received: from willy.net1.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:34829 "EHLO willy.net1.nerim.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262372AbVADVwM (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:52:12 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 22:43:24 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: "Theodore Ts'o" , Horst von Brand , Thomas Graf , Bill Davidsen , Adrian Bunk , Diego Calleja , wli@holomorphy.com, aebr@win.tue.nl, solt2@dns.toxicfilms.tv, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: starting with 2.7 Message-ID: <20050104214324.GG22075@alpha.home.local> References: <20050104031229.GE26856@postel.suug.ch> <200501041534.j04FY9g7008583@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> <20050104211910.GB7280@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050104211910.GB7280@thunk.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 04:19:10PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > The problem with the -rc releases is that we try to predict in advance > which releases in advance will be stable, and we don't seem to be able > to do a good job of that. I really like this description, it's the most accurate description I ever read of an -rc release. I wish you could convince Linus with it. The problem with -rc is that if we try to predict, it implies that we don't expect to count much on user reports. Then why do an -rc at all if we don't expect enough testings ? > If we do a release every week, my guess is > that at least 1 in 3 releases will turn out to be stable enough for > most purposes. But we won't know until after 2 or 3 days which > releases will be the good ones. That's always been my point, and one of the reasons why *some* of Alan's kernels work well. > In practice, that's all the -rc releases are these days anyway (there > are times when a 2.6.x-rcy release is more stable than 2.6.z). The > problem is that since the -rc releases are called what they are > called, they don't get enough testing. Perfectly true. I would add that with -rc releases, people only upgrade when we tell them that they can, while with more frequent releases, they upgrade when they *need* to, and can try several versions if the first one they pick does not work. Regards, Willy