On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 11:21 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> .... But from rc5 on thru rc7 or 8 and > release, unless you're one of the ones still waiting on a bug found > earlier to be fixed, it's generally quite stable and boring. > > So by the time of actual .0 release, it really is quite stable, and no > longer development kernel. Sure, Greg KH's stable series kernel releases > stabilize it further, but that's exactly what they are, stable series, > not development series, and there's really no development going into it > generally from rc1 on, tho occasionally something that needs to come > after everything else is slipped in in the first couple days after rc1, > but still well before rc2, and the .0 release signifies the end of the > post development stabilization period such that .0 really is no longer a > development kernel at all, even if there are a few more weekly stable- > series updates (about 10, 3.15.10 was announced to be the last one for > 3.15, with the Friday-released 3.15.9) before support ceases if it's not > a long-term-stable candidate. > I can't say I've observed that to be the case with Btrfs. I know there is a core group of developers working very hard on testing the Btrfs updates in the _rc kernels, but once that .0 kernel hits the streets, the extra exposure to all the various combinations of hardware and options has been know to discover new issues. I think this is nearly unavoidable given the pace of Btrfs development. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
