Linus Torvalds' deputy has claimed that the development of the Linux kernel is slowing down, with noticeably less features and bug fixes planned for a future version.
Andrew Morton, the lead maintainer of the Linux production kernel, said last week that although the next version of the kernel is due for final release soon, few features have been planned for the subsequent release.
"There doesn't seem to be much happening out there wrt 2.6.15," said Morton in a mailing list posting. "We're at rc2 [the second release candidate of 2.6.14] and I only have only maybe 100 patches tagged for 2.6.15 at this time. The number of actual major features lined up for 2.6.15 looks relatively small too," he said in a later posting.
He suggested this may indicate that the kernel is nearing completion. "Famous last words, but the actual patch volume _has_ to drop off one day," said Morton. "We have to finish this thing one day."
In the same mailing list thread, Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux and the maintainer of the development kernel, expressed concerns that the kernel development process may need to be changed to make sure that Morton is not overworked.
At present, all patches are first merged with a code branch maintained by Morton, called the -mm tree, before they reach the main code branch. This means that Morton is responsible for initially testing and stabilising all patches, which Torvalds was concerned could be too heavy a workload.
"One issue is that I actually worry that Andrew will at some point be where I was a couple of years ago — overworked and stressed out by just tons and tons of patches," said Torvalds. "If Andrew burns out, we'll all suffer hugely."
But Morton said that the number of patches is not so much of a problem as resolving bugs. "Bugs are a big problem — it takes 4 hours minimum to get a -mm out the door and a single bug can cause it to slip to the next day in which case I have to start again," said Morton. "I'd like to release -mm's more often and I'd like -mm to have less of a wild-and-crappy reputation. Both of these would happen if originators were to test their stuff more carefully."
Talkback
Linux is dead. Long live Windows Vista!
I personally would like to see more time spent on refinement instead of "just new releases" of the kernel and all of the free software being developed. I don't want to sound ungrateful, but it seems newer realeases of GNU/Linux distributions aim to be so "bleeding edge" that they are less stable than their previous editions, thus hurting the adoption of open software. More acceptance of open source software will benefit everyone, so the quality is more important than ever as peiople become more aware of alternatives to the "dominant" OS. Open source will encourage more innovation and more solutions to the world.The developers in the open source movement have given a great gift to the world. Let's also make sure the quality is there and kill the FUD.
I don't see a problem there. The new kernel is going to be ready for publishing.
As for Vista, it is not ready yet and won't be for a long time.
This is to be expected. Unlike proprietary software developers, the Linux kernel coders do NOT have to churn the user base for more Licen$e Monie$, under the guise of "upgrades", so that the world's richest man can stay on top of heap.
It will probably move into the minor maintenance and polishing mode to allow for hardware additions and changes, and to tweak size, speed, stability and security.
Linus and the crew deserve the Nobel Prize.
Who said that Linux is dead? Frankly, either the kernel's development is slowing down because there isn't so much you can add to the beast without working it all over (let's start the 3.0 branch :p) or developers are losing interest in the beast - which could pretty much amount to the same thing.
Now, I don't know that much about kernel development; I hiowever know that the kernel is still lacking on some big features such as modularity: not everything in it is modular, and the module interface isn't set. Modularity in the kernel appeared in Linux 2.0, it proved its use, now why not start kernel 3.0 to implement a complete modularity scheme? At least Linus Torvalds and Alex Tanenbaum would be able to see eye to eye on the matter, the Hurd crowd would be interested, and the pro-BSD/anti-Linux ones would have one less bone to chew on... Oh, and of course, this time the Win guys would lose all pretense of having the most stable software...
the kernel is just getting better and better at hardware detection. You cannot stop new hardware development, so there is no end to kernel development. maybe the name rev will be bumped up, but the development will not stop. I think there are too many of us now, for linux to be just one accident away from death. Windows sucks. I has never been the most stable OS and will always be a bunch of duct taped code. MS will always sell it as the software with the most expensive duct tape out there. Have you had your ms patch today? they say it cannot cure cancer, but it will help with that one pixel that keeps blinking over java windows. Maybe it does cure cancer.
Windows Vista is a stillbirth. Features that were supposed to be implemented have been stripped out, and DRM will make sure that people will turn away from it when they can't play stuff they've purchased without paying for it again.
Just because development on an essential part of the OS has stopped, it doesn't mean that the OS is dead. In fact, constant development can often be worse for an OS (look at the bloat of Windows, and the problems they've had after integrating stuff with the kernel).
Rob's wonderful post was so funny I almost fell off my chair. Not sure if it was tongue-in-cheek but it certainly excersised the beardies!
Before you flame, I use Linux as well as many flavours of Unix *and* Windows, and it's horses for courses as far as I'm concerned.
I just enjoy seeing the zealots get wound up.
I agree with you. Linux Torvalds and his team deserves a Nobel prize. Stallman's GNU Fundation too (and this fundation have UNESCO support now! Cheers!)