Version naming, can we have 2.3.100 please, was Re: 2.3.99-pre9 ?

From: Kees Bakker (kees_bakker@tasking.nl)
Date: Fri May 19 2000 - 03:22:45 EDT

  • Next message: Wang Jian: "Re: [patch] Re: 2.3.99-pre8 oddity (please CC: me)"

    >>>>> "Brian" == Brian Gerst <bgerst@quark.vpplus.com> writes:

    Brian> "Robert L. Harris" wrote:
    >>
    >> I've been checking all the mirrors and can't find -pre9, only -pre8.
    >> Is there a hidden mirror I've missed or something?

    Brian> pre9-2 is in the testing directory on the kernel mirrors. The 2.3.99
    Brian> kernels are really confusing since there are two levels of prepatches.
    Brian> It would be better off to just finish off 2.3.99 and start on 2.3.100
    Brian> without the messed up version naming.

    Sounds good!

    Apparently there is still too much to do before 2.4 comes out. For the time
    being it would be better to switch back to the normal version naming
    convention. That way we will get more testers, I'm sure. It is currently
    too difficult for many developers (testers) to even find the latest
    patches. And the pre patches are too big, even the pre-pre patches are
    big.

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 19 2000 - 03:26:36 EDT