[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    Subject[OT] Please don't call it 3.0!! (was Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA)))

    So what's the verdict? Are we calling it 3.0 or 2.6? Who am I to say
    this, but I really feel calling it kernel 3.0 is not fully justified. We
    should stick with the 2.x series until major ABI or API changes break the
    C library in massive ways, at which point we increment the major version

    Although its tempting to appeal to the mainstream by inflating the version
    number artificially (what's Redhat up to now? 8.0?? sheesh!!), we have to
    respect ourselves as developers. Why call it 3.0, other than to stroke
    our own egos?

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:0.019 / U:83.992 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site