[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Re: 2.4.13 Stability?

Matthew Sackman wrote:

> A quick and easy solution would simply to have a status line at the top
> of the ext3 homepage (and download page) which simply says what is
> available and what isn't available - I think that if people know then
> the developers may not have to get frustrated when new diffs are
> demanded of them every other day.

You'll still get people asking when it will be available, though. I'm
not sure what could resolve this problem, other than taking a cluebat to
certain individuals. I'm not sure why it isn't obvious to everyone that
a new kernel may include changes that affect ext3, such that code
changes are required beyond what the diff-generating procedure can do by
itself. I mean, the whole point of a new kernel is that some code has
changed, and lately, some of the changes (particularly in the VM) have
had implications for ext3.

It might help to have a policy statement on the ext3-2.4 web page saying
something like "Don't expect patches for a new kernel until it's been
out a few days." Though, of course, then you'll get people who read that
as a promise that a patch _will_ be available after only a few days,
which may not always be the case. There never were patches for 2.4.11 or
2.4.12, presumably because both releases were short-lived and

I'm not sure how one could say it and get the idea across properly.
Ideally, it should be a single, simple, unchanging policy statement so
the ext3 team doesn't have to redo it every time a new kernel comes out.

I suppose one could risk being perceived as rude, and just say, "Patches
will be released when they're ready -- don't bug us about it." Which
would be fine with me, actually. I'm happy to wait until the ext3 team
feels a new patch is ready for real use, however long that may take.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]