Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 02:21:38PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

>  - 2.6.<even>: even at all levels, aim for having had minimally intrusive
>    patches leading up to it (timeframe: a week or two)
>
> with the odd numbers going like:
>
>  - 2.6.<odd>: still a stable kernel, but accept bigger changes leading up
>    to it (timeframe: a month or two).
>  - 2.<odd>.x: aim for big changes that may destabilize the kernel for
>    several releases (timeframe: a year or two)

[...]

Why not change the "2.6 prefix" to 2.8, 3.0 (or whatever) if/when you
do go to a new naming scheme --- simply to make a clean break between
the new and the old.  Plus it will give the suckdork crowd[1] bigger
numbers to drivel on about.

That said it would be a large numerical leap without and real feature
changes so perhaps that will further add to confusion?

Sigh.



[1] Well, and the CGL and similar people.  "New CGL with improved
    version numbers and fewer calories!"
-
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/