hello, again I think what we are trying to say is that some of us are working on debugging kernels that are meant to run "forever" and therefor it is a good thing to spent some time thinking about a kind of kernel release in the 2.6 series that can be considered as stable. Besides what you say is correct but you can not provide argument for a stable software in the terms of what you are writing. because if you have a look at the changes done to the kernel code you'll admit that these are not a bug fixes but real changes that should lead the kernel to a new version (may be even not minor) I don't argue I just agree with Anand that this is even worse than commercial software company practice. I would agree with you if new minor versions does not impact working stuff, but this is NOT the case, ,so you are somehow WRONG! sorry for that regards --- On Wed, 7/30/08, Daniel Stone <daniel.stone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Daniel Stone <daniel.stone@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: USB driver issue > To: "ext Gadiyar, Anand" <gadiyar@xxxxxx> > Cc: "felipe.balbi@xxxxxxxxx" <felipe.balbi@xxxxxxxxx>, "ext Emanoil Kotsev" <deloptes@xxxxxxxxx>, "linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-omap-open-source@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-omap-open-source@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "SUBHRANIL CHOUDHURY" <subhra85@xxxxxxxxx>, "linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2008, 6:44 PM > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 09:53:43PM +0530, ext Gadiyar, Anand > wrote: > > Grr. Saying one needs to upgrade to the latest kernel > before one can expect > > support is a bit like certain proprietary OS vendors - > and even they do a better > > job than this. > > If you want to support people running 2.6.22, good for you. > You seem to > be happy with a codebase that doesn't change as much, > so I'm sure you'll > have fun supporting it. > > I'm getting the feeling that we need a new Godwin's > law: as a thread > involving a complaint about open source grows longer, the > probability of > a comparison involving Microsoft approaches one. > > So yes, some people don't want to support old code on > their own time. > So what? Who are you to tell them that they can't do > this? What was the > point of the Microsoft comparison, except to reinforce > stereotypes that > free software developers are a bunch of freaks with > unhealthy obsessions > on Microsoft and LOL BILL GATES IS THE SUCK? > > (Bearing in mind that one of the main tenets of open source > development > is 'release early and release often', you could > say that having > everyone use very old code until you one day drop a huge > chunk of > rewritten new code on them is also OMG MICROSOFT. But > that'd be > equally stupid.) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html