Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Jul 2008 06:22:25 +0200 | From | Rene Herman <> | Subject | Re: From 2.4 to 2.6 to 2.7? |
| |
On 15-07-08 20:04, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Clearly, the 2. prefix has long outlived its usefulness as far as Linux > is concerned, and probably the 6 as well.
Been calling the -stable branches v20, v21, v22, ... here.
I do believe the numbering scheme should at least ostensibly still be feature driven, not be a fully robotic date thing. With the latter, you definitely miss out on press-opportunities and that's not even meant cynical. There just is a bit of industry around Linux and the promotion opportunities of (say) "Linux 3" are really lots, lots bigger than anything boringly date based.
That even holds for things like books -- I just bet that a "all new, covers Linux 3!" blurp on the cover sells lots more copies than a "all new, covers the march 21st 2009 version of Linux!" one.
But yes, the current monotic increase is definitely getting a bit boring as well. The kernel as of 2.6.26 is quite different from the kernel that was known as 2.6.0 so just be creative I'd say and set a 2.8 goal. Next version can be 2.9 (should be clear enough by then) and then watch world domination happen with the big 3.0 release.
Linux 2010.5? Boooooooooring....
Rene.
| |