| | Date | Wed, 2 Mar 2005 20:10:20 -0800 | | From | Chris Wedgwood <> | | Subject | Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering |
| |
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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|