Linux 2.4 before 2001?

[Mike A. Harris]

This message deals with concerns of projected release dates of
the kernel that are way way off in left field and way to
premature.

After 2.0.0 came out and the devel cycle 2.1.x was started, it
was projected that it would be out within a year.  I'm sure you
all remember the details.  As time went on, the release date was
said to be around Christmas 1997 for 2.2.. which slipped to Q1
1998, and then Q2, Q3, etc..  until it eventually was released
late Januarry 1999.  It was a great improvment indeed, and worth
waiting for.

By far and large, everyone including Linus agreed that the
release cycle for 2.2 was WAY too long, and I remember reading
that the 2.3->2.4 cycle would indeed be MUCH shorter.  Linus
wanted the 2.4 kernel out quickly, and last March or so, it was
said that the 2.4 kernel was scheduled for release in Fall 1999.
This was later relegated to be "hopefully before Christmas", and
now the last that I've heard is "Sometime in Q1 2000".

I'm not extremely adept at all of the innards of the kernel, or
how long the various things that need to be done take, but in
looking at kernels past - 2.0.0 -> 2.2.0, and following all
2.2.x, and 2.3.x development, I feel very doubtful of any Q1Y2K
release.

I just looked at Alan Cox's "must be fixed before 2.4.0" list,
and it looks to me that it will take 2 months minimum for:

1) those fixes to get incorporated,
2) other fixes proposed by others that are not on the AC list
3) more bugs that crop up during that time
4) testing
5) prerelease and final bug testing

All of this assumes that no more MAJOR changes are made to the
kernel in the mean time.

In trying to be realistic, I think that the 2.4.0 kernel will not
arrive before May 1, 1999 if not later.  The signs I see right
now, when compared to previous releases of 2.2.0, and 2.0.0 seem
to point in this direction.

This brings up a point:  Why do developers of the kernel, or any
other software project for that matter - give bunk projected
release dates at all?  It introduces the "vaporware" concept, and
makes things look bad.  In reality, there are so many people
working on the kernel, that at any point, some major cool new
feature, patch, speedup, or whatnot can happen, and often does,
and this often pushes the stabilization and release back a month
or more.

Since this is unlikely to change, why not just stop projecting
the release dates entirely?  It is something unpredictable.
A lot of major companies flat out refuse to give dates on things
because they don't want dissappointed customers when the date
can't be met.  Why don't we all take the same approach too?
After all, the date of release is not going to be forced due to
bad projections giving expectations right?

So, my whole point here is:  Do not project the major kernel
release dates as it is bad press.  It gets expectations up, and
lets some people down.  Even far speculation is bad because
people will turn it into a serious release date.  So saying
"maybe by the end of the year" will be turned into "oh it is
definitely coming out by the end of the year" by someone else".

All in all, linux will be released "when it is done" which is
more or less id software's release policy.  Why don't we adopt
the same policy?

Just some food for thought.  Keep up the great work, and stop
playing with the Quake source code!  ;o)

Take care everyone!
TTYL

--
Mike A. Harris                                     Linux advocate     
Computer Consultant                                  GNU advocate  
Capslock Consulting                          Open Source advocate

Join the FreeMWare project - the goal to produce a FREE program in
which you can run Windows 95/98/NT, and other operating systems.

                    http://www.freemware.org