[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change
    Greg KH wrote:
    > We number the kernel based on the year, and the numbers of releases we
    > have done this year:
    > For example, the first release in 2009 would be called:
    > 2009.0.0
    > The second:
    > 2009.1.0
    > If we want to be a bit more "non-zero-counting" friendly: we can start
    > at "1" for the number:
    > 2009.1.0 for the first release
    > 2009.2.0 for the second.
    > Then the stable releases can increment the minor number:
    > 2009.1.1 for the first stable release
    > 2009.1.2 for the second.
    > and so on.
    > Benefits of this is it more accuratly represents to people just how old
    > the kernel they are currently running is (2.6.9 would be have been
    > 2004.9.0 on this naming scheme.)
    > Yes, we can handle the major/minor macros in the kernel to provide a
    > compatible number so that automated scripts will not break, that's not a
    > big deal.
    > Any thoughts?

    What about:
    - rc releases: a 2009.5.0-rc4 become suddenly 2010.0.0-rc5 ?
    - a stable version in January of a kernel released in December
    still has the old year? (I hope yes, but it could confuse users.)
    - when (if) we need a big innovative (or incompatible) kernel
    change, how to mark old and new kernels?


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-10-17 14:49    [W:0.021 / U:13.648 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site