Adrian Bunk does (did?) this with 2.6.16.x, although it always seemed to
me like an unrewarded one man show. AFAIK not even the big distros are
begging for bugfix-only versions, as they too want to have (sell) new
features. Mission critical systems might want to require such versions,
but I guess they're using heavily customized trees anyway.
Hm, that's what I had in mind. Has this been tried already?
Naah, I'm not really in favour of blaming someone. The kernel doesn't have
SLA contracts (yet), so no need for giving out penalties :)
Keeping track of the (number of) regressions / bugs each release seems to
be a good start, IMHO.
True. Implementing "only bugfixes from now on" (i.e. a longer
freeze-window) would perhaps speed up the shifting a bit: $developer can
still do $otherstuff all day long, but it won't get merged anyway, because
we're in "only bugfixes from now on"-mode.
True. But I just noticed that I have to distinguish between
"flamewars" and "fierce discussions": if I'd imagine a room with ~50
developers/bystanders brainstorming on a issue like this (at the same
time, without the wonderful delay of writing/sending an email), it'd
feel much more uncomfortable.
Christian.
--
BOFH excuse #433:
error: one bad user found in front of screen
-