[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: Kernel release numbering
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Massimo Cetra wrote:

> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> Namely that we could adopt the even/odd numbering scheme that
>> we used to do on a minor number basis, and instead of
>> dropping it entirely like we did, we could have just moved it
>> to the release number, as an indication of what was the
>> intent of the release.
>> Comments?
> This is surely a good idea because end users (not developers) like me would
> have greater possibility not to occur in a regression with an even release.

What I would like to see as an enduser is (dreaming):
kernel 2.6.x - last released

often released (every 1-2 weeks) kernel 2.6.x.z
containing just the answers to the often repeating
lkml questions which are answered with "use $this simple patch"

kernel 2.6.y-pre/rc/bk - development, working towards 2.6.y

in practice your proposed 2.6.even changes, but these continued until the
next kernel is released, not stopped after 1-2 weeks with the worst fixes.
(a bit like the -as series, but with the "official blessing")



The Internet treats censorship as a routing problem, and routes around it.
(John Gilmore on
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:10    [W:0.510 / U:15.412 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site