From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761595AbXF0RL5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:11:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756438AbXF0RLu (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:11:50 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:37832 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751600AbXF0RLu (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:11:50 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:11:49 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Al Boldi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0 Message-ID: <20070627171149.GZ21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> References: <200706271653.58870.a1426z@gawab.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200706271653.58870.a1426z@gawab.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 04:53:58PM +0300, Al Boldi wrote: > Al Viro wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 11:18:36AM +0200, Zolt?n HUBERT wrote: > > > And as I understand it, this is (was ?) the whole point of > > > stable/development kernels. "We" can trust a newer stable > > > kernel to be a drop-in replacement for an older stable > > > kernel (from the same series), while development kernels > > > need time to stabilise with the new whizz-bang-pfouit stuff > > > that you all so nicely add. > > > > "Drop-in" in which sense? That out-of-tree modules keep working? > > Not really... > > Al, be reasonable. There are many out-of-tree GPL modules that won't be > accepted into mainline, never mind those that shouldn't be accepted. But > these modules do have a right to not be obsoleted by constant API changes. Modules do not have any rights; it's software, for fsck sake... > You are effectively inhibiting the development of an out-of-tree GPL module > pool, by constantly pulling the rug under that community. The same thing happens with any yet-to-be-merged code. > Do you think this is fair? Yes, it is fair. Decision to maintain your code out of tree indefinitely is your decision.