Messages in this thread | | | From | el es <> | Subject | Re: Kernel version : what about s.yy.ww.tt scheme ? | Date | Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:30:13 +0000 (UTC) |
| |
<david <at> lang.hm> writes:
> you are well past the point where the complexity overwelmes the > information you are providing. > > does it really matter _exactly_ when a release was made? > > David Lang > It might not really matter, but if you could find a reason for it to be useful, then why not ?
As I wrote before, the development of the kernel is currently quite fast-paced. The scale of changes is not that dramatic as it was in the early days, is it ? Of course things get added, removed and so on. You even get lots of development trees tested in linux-next on a daily basis. With date-based version number, you can exactly position your own tree in time related to the current development. It is more human-readable. The version number as it is, just does not entirely fit the current model of development IMO - with 2 week merge window and roughly 2 months of stabilization period, the counter becomes sort of uninformative... But for the releases, the week-based granularity seems to be enough - the current habit of having a stable by number is actually OK too, since the -stable team does its job. So, yes, to have a similar version number to what is used currently, the scheme could be s.yy.ww.[nn || -rcX], s=series (2), yy= year, ww=week when the tree was released, nn= stable number. What do you think ?
| |