On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 04:37:54PM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:Huh? I never said that! Maybe I did not explain myself well, but that was not what I was saying. I was simply saying that the good news about Greg keeping 2.6.22.y open was that I'd throw my 2.6.20.y away and rely on his tree instead. I'm not really sure there's a need for 2.6.22 for a longer time. I did that for 2.6.20 because .21 was crappy, people did not want to jump to the fresh new 2.6.22 and it was unfair to expect Greg&Chris to maintain 3 versions in parallel, it's already cool to have two of them. 2.6.23.y looks very good to me, so I don't see what particular reason people would have not to switch right now. But if there is a very good reason (not motivated by unfixed regressions) and *if* it does not take me too many hours a week, I'm not against this idea since I'm still using 2.6.22 on some machines right now. But don't expect too many releases though. Regards, Willy --
| Trent Piepho | [PATCH] [POWERPC] Improve (in|out)_beXX() asm code |
| Stoyan Gaydarov | From 2.4 to 2.6 to 2.7? |
| Andi Kleen | [PATCH] [4/50] x86: add cpu codenames for Kconfig.cpu |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 013/196] Documentation: Replace obsolete "driverfs" with "sysfs". |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: HTB accuracy for high speed |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
