Re: 2.6.28-rc1 --> 2.8.0-rc1; 2.6.27.y --> 2.6.28 [Re: [RFC] Kernelversion numbering scheme change]

[Mikael Abrahamsson]

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, Dominik Brodowski wrote:

> Well, Linus hasn't yet changed SUBLEVEL or EXTRAVERSION[*]. But Adrian 
> has already stated that he will support what is known as 2.6.27 for a 
> long time. What about Linus naming the next release 2.8.0 (and move on 
> with 2.8.1, 2.8.2, ... with no special meaning to the numbers), so 
> instead of 2.6.28-rc1 it's 2.8.0-rc1. And once Adrian takes over from 
> the -stable team, he could release 2.6.28, 2.6.29 and so on when he 
> thinks a new minor number is appropriate, such as Willy intends to 
> release 2.4.37.

Unless we change the meaning of the numbers, I see little reason to bump 
to 2.8.

The only reason for change would be to merge 2.6 into 3, so we don't need 
2.6.29, 2.6.29.1, but instead we go to 3.0, 3.0.1, 3.0.2 and then 
3.1-rc1 becomes 3.1 and 3.1.1 is the next patch of it, and then 
3.2-rc1 etc. I don't see a problem to go over 9 on the second number 
either, so 3.23-rc1 is fine.

Makes it one less number to describe what kernel one is talking about. 
Saying 2.6.29.2 is a bit cumbersome, I'd much prefer 3.0.2.

--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@xxxxxxxxx
--
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/