lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-07-16 06:25    [W:0.245 / U:0.708 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site