Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:27:56 +0000 | From | "Justin Mattock" <> | Subject | Re: Kernel version : what about s.yy.ww.tt scheme ? |
| |
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:38 AM, el es <el_es_cr@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Jan Engelhardt <jengelh <at> medozas.de> writes: > >> >The scheme to be s.yy.ww.tt, that is : >> > >> >s - series, as it is now (freedom to Linus to bump it to 3 when BKL is removed >> >for example ;) ) >> >yy - two (in a hundred years, three) digits of the year >> >Now the interesting part begins which is >> >ww - the number of the week of the release. This will be between 1 and 52 (53) >> >tt - the number of the week of stable release. As above. >> >> Interesting idea. >> > > Thanks :) > >> -stable usually overlaps with master. But I don't like version >> numbers long as binutils and "2.8.30.9.01" have. > > Yes, master and stable accumulate the same patches, I know. Only master takes > new code, whereas -stable does not. > > This however tells how long did it take to produce the -stable release out of > Linus's release ;) And it does not break the current habits - just abuses them a > bit ;) > And tells you how long the version was around there without another -stable > release too. Just by looking onto the version string, quick, sortable in > meaningful way, all sorts of pluses there ;) > > IMO, the kernel is so mature already, and the development is so fast, and the > changes not always so fundamental, that the version in the old sense becomes > irrelevant - it is not the 2.4->2.6 transition days any more ;) > > > > Regards, > Lukasz (btw sorry I forgot to sign myself last time ;) > > > > -- > 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/ >
What about how porsch does it i.g. 911, 912, 913, 914
-- Justin P. Mattock
| |