Re: Can't wait for '2.8 or 3.0',or maybe: 2.8 followed by 2.10 ??

[bill davidsen]

In article <00a501c3c564$fd4a91f0$0e25fe0a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Maciej Soltysiak <solt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| > I think we should consider introduce a policy of having .*beaver.*
| > names for each 2.6.x release, and maybe drop the version numbers
| > altogether during 2.7.
| How about a naming policy of something going along this:
| Stag (2.2)
| Wolfling (2.4)
| Beaver (2.6)
| Rooster (2.7)
| Ostrich (2.8)
| Sharkey (2.9)
| Cheetah (3.0)
| 
| And all having names of animals. Like in Croatia, their local currency
| has only pictures of animals and plants on the bills and coins.

The stable releases should have the names of nice non-threatening
herbivores, like beaver, and the development trees should have names of
omnivores. Subreleases can have an adjective prepended, like singing,
dancing, horny, constipated... well, maybe someone else should do the
naming of subversions ;-)

A good job by any name.
-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
-
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/