Re: From 2.4 to 2.6 to 2.7?

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:07:21AM -0400, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
> Well, we just haven't had anything big enough to merit an increase in the
> minor number lately. I nominate the removal of the BKL as one such feature,
> based on the sheer work required and how many modules you'll need to touch 
> to
> do so. In fact, it would be the natural conclusion to a 2.x series that
> highlighted SMP as its primary new feature.
> 
> But it's hard now to predict future milestones, or when an overall paradigm
> shift might happen. In those cases you'll want to give Linux a bright new
> announcement to the world, instead of it being "just another standard year 
> of
> kernel development".
> 
> Remember, you used to have versions called 1.3.100 before -- and they seemed
> perfectly normal back then. I personally like how we're still on 2.y.z 
> numbers
> compared to all of the other OSes (Solaris 11, HP-UX 11)...it makes Linux 
> still
> feel young, showing how much better it can get ;-)
> 
> So I vote for releasing by "features" still, and keep the current numbering
> scheme. Who knows when the next big idea will pop up that's worthy of 3.0.0.

Didn't HP-UX 11 come out around a decade ago?  Did they stop
development?

-- 
Len Sorensen
--
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/