Re: From 2.4 to 2.6 to 2.7?

From: Rene Herman
Date: Wed Jul 16 2008 - 03:16:04 EST


On 16-07-08 08:55, Rafael C. de Almeida wrote:

Rene Herman wrote:

I do believe the numbering scheme should at least ostensibly still be
feature driven, not be a fully robotic date thing. With the latter, you
definitely miss out on press-opportunities and that's not even meant
cynical. There just is a bit of industry around Linux and the promotion
opportunities of (say) "Linux 3" are really lots, lots bigger than
anything boringly date based.

And that's why after the adoption of generics and a few things java all
the sudden became java 5. I don't like that. I hope the world gets used
to learning things instead of just being driven by a pretty number.

I don't. I hate bores.

More importantly though, that's really the kind of thing where you can argue about how life should and/or could be until you're blue in the face but if it isn't, it doesn't actually matter any. People intimately involved with a project like Linux (say, subscribers to this list) definitely look quite different at it than others and that's nothing bad. Communicating information to these people through shortcuts like version numbers isn't necesarily anything to avoid.

There ARE features in the pipeline you could plan for that would warrant a version jump. I'd for example consider being able to run X not as root a very worthy goal for a version jump (be it 2.8 or 3.0). That's also a change in the area where those that are NOT intimately involved yet interested in a more than professional way are -- on the desktop.

Really. I'd like it much better if the big cool feature of the all new Linux kernel would be running X as user, rather than when the big cool feature of X running as a user would require a version of Linux newer than the february 2010 release.

If you get what I mean. Do trust me, you'll have time and opportunity enough in your lifetime to be boringly professional.

Rene.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/