xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Hi! I've noticed that kernel.org advertises 2.6.28 as "The latest st

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Hi! I've noticed that kernel.org advertises 2.6.28 as "The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is".
From: David Newall <davidn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:32:21 +1030
Cc: Igor Podlesny <for.poige+linux@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20081229092124.GA18987@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <43d009740812282139x7597aafbn4474455c1aa1e0e8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081229092124.GA18987@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227)
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> instead of these rants bug reports would be more useful.

Igor didn't rant, not even a little bit, and it reflects poorly on you
that you engage in hyperbole rather than hear his story.  In fact, or at
least in my opinion as a computer programmer with 30 years experience,
he's right: A newly stable kernel is not stable.  He might even be right
about regressions since 2.6.24.

It's a sorry day when somebody making a simple, reasonable and accurate
feedback is criticised for not providing bug reports.  But don't let him
(or me) stop you guys from toasting your fine success.  You believe it's
stable; what more could anyone want?

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>