Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering

[Alan Cox]

On Iau, 2005-03-03 at 01:27, Dave Jones wrote:
> In an ideal world, we'd see a single 'y' release of 2.6.x.y, but if x+1 takes
> too long to be released, bits of x+1 should also appear in x.y+1
> The only question in my mind is 'how critical does a bug have to be to
> justify a .y release.  Once a new 'x' release comes out, the previous x.y
> would likely no longer get any further fixes (unless someone decides the
> new 'x' sucked so bad).

Do the statistics on rate of discovery of security problems (generally
low priority and by good guys/verification tools) and you are looking at
about x.y.8 or so assuming there are no 2.x.y.z releases for post
release howlers.

-
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/