linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 3.12 released .. and no merge window yet .. and 4.0 plans?
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 19:11:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+8MBbJeQNBo=W1Gu2bBDQ83e0r3Omc3FdJjjGbxrAi0NM61Ww@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwLkvSkparyvekdmMyvr6Srw1KkzTBp=_w0oQRWnPpJug@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> And the reason I mention "4.0" is that it would be a lovely time to do
> that. Roughly a years heads-up that "ok, after 3.19 (or whatever),
> we're doing a release with *just* fixes, and then that becomes 4.0".
>
> Comments?

Unless you are planning to kick out releases significantly faster
than you have over the past few years ... then "roughly a year"
and "3.19" don't really match up. 3.17 would be a better guess.

This means you are ignoring the Knuth-ites who think 3.14 should
be followed by 3.141, 3.1415, 3.14159 etc. :-)

What would the rules look like for a "fixes-only" release? With
no merge window of new stuff would you enforce a "nothing
except regressions" policy after -rcN (for N >=3).  That might
feel odd in a fixes release to tell someone that their fix isn't
going to be taken.  But we all want the fixes release to converge
quickly so we can return to "ooh shiny" stuff - so "too big,
too late" should probably still be the rule.

Perhaps all the bugs to be fixed need to be logged in
bugzilla.kernel.org with some "for 4.0" tag by the
start of this fixes window - then we'd have some bound
on the release criteria for 4.0?

-Tony

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-04  3:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-04  0:10 Linux 3.12 released .. and no merge window yet .. and 4.0 plans? Linus Torvalds
2013-11-04  3:11 ` Tony Luck [this message]
2013-11-04  6:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-11-04 19:08   ` Josh Boyer
2013-11-04 19:53     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-11-07  4:40   ` Greg KH
2013-11-07  9:01     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-11-04 17:00 ` Alexander Holler
2013-11-04 19:49   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-11-04 20:16     ` Alexander Holler
2013-11-04 23:02     ` Alexander Holler
2013-11-06 13:42       ` Keith Curtis
2013-11-07 10:17         ` Alexander Holler
2013-11-15  1:11           ` Keith Curtis
2013-11-04 20:05 ` Olof Johansson
2013-11-04 20:12 ` Hans de Bruin
2013-11-04 21:46 ` Linux 3.12 released " Jan Engelhardt
2013-11-05  5:06   ` Aldo Iljazi
2013-11-05  5:08   ` Alexander Holler
2013-11-04 21:57 ` Linux 3.12 released .. and no merge window yet " One Thousand Gnomes
2013-11-10  4:13 ` Alexandre Oliva

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CA+8MBbJeQNBo=W1Gu2bBDQ83e0r3Omc3FdJjjGbxrAi0NM61Ww@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=tony.luck@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).