RE: Kernel release numbering

[Sven-Haegar Koch]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Massimo Cetra wrote:

> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > Namely that we could adopt the even/odd numbering scheme that
> > we used to do on a minor number basis, and instead of
> > dropping it entirely like we did, we could have just moved it
> > to the release number, as an indication of what was the
> > intent of the release.
>
> > Comments?
>
> This is surely a good idea because end users (not developers) like me would
> have greater possibility not to occur in a regression with an even release.

What I would like to see as an enduser is (dreaming):
	kernel 2.6.x - last released

	often released (every 1-2 weeks) kernel 2.6.x.z
	containing just the answers to the often repeating
	lkml questions which are answered with "use $this simple patch"

	kernel 2.6.y-pre/rc/bk - development, working towards 2.6.y

in practice your proposed 2.6.even changes, but these continued until the 
next kernel is released, not stopped after 1-2 weeks with the worst fixes.
(a bit like the -as series, but with the "official blessing")

c'ya
sven

--

The Internet treats censorship as a routing problem, and routes around it.
(John Gilmore on http://www.cygnus.com/~gnu/)
-
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/