FC2 release dates

[Jeremy Katz]

On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 19:20, Dag Wieers wrote:
> Adding it to the updates (or testing) would probably reach a bigger target 
> group. The next release could default to 2.6 and optionally 2.4 (for 
> hardware or software that worked on 2.4 but doesn't on 2.6 anymore)

Optional kernels are a losing proposition.  The installer can really
only run with one kernel (otherwise, there's a large number of things
that has to be conditional on kernel version which leads to absurd
amounts of pain, especially as only one path will get tested) at which
point 2.6 *has* to work for people's hardware so that they can install. 
Even if you discount that, how do you present an option like that?  
  [ ] My hardware sucks, use 2.4
  [*] Use 2.6 like the rest of the world
You don't even know if your hardware is going to have problems until
you're already using 2.6.

Also, there are some things that would be nice to do along with 2.6 that
will then require the system to be using 2.6 -- things like switching to
ALSA across the board, using udev to get persistent device naming, and
others.

> It's a small difference (maybe even psychological), but if you want to 
> test it in advance, the more people/hardware you can test it on, the 
> better the next release will integrate.

Having things so that both 2.4 and 2.6 work mean that the integration of
2.6 isn't going to be as smooth.

Cheers,

Jeremy