[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:0.179 / U:44.552 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site