Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 31 Dec 1998 09:02:27 -0500 | From | Ben Collins <> | Subject | Re: I vote for incrimenting the version number to 3.0.0 |
| |
On Wed, Dec 30, 1998 at 07:56:45PM -0500, Anthony Barbachan wrote: > Have it more sellable is just a nice side effect, my main argument is that > the amount of changes and additions to the kernel justifies its version > being incrimented to 3.0.0. A .2 upgrade usually denotes a minor upgrade.
Actually way back when versions were generally standard across the the different software programs a .x increase was considered major feature enhancement, while .0.x was considered interim bug fix releases. Full version increases were generally left for what most considered _full_ rewrites and major overhauls.
The increase from kernel 1 to 2 saw, iirc, ext2, elf, and a slew of over changes. It generally changed the way we ran Linux. 2.2 is a great achievment but we still run it the same as before, just faster, with more cpu's, more supported hardware...you know, features :)
-- ----- -- - -------- --------- ---- ------- ----- - - --- -------- Ben Collins <b.m.collins@larc.nasa.gov> Debian GNU/Linux UnixGroup Admin - Jordan Systems Inc. bcollins@debian.org ------ -- ----- - - ------- ------- -- The Choice of the GNU Generation
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |