[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Kernel version : what about scheme ?
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, el es wrote:

>> also, causes trouble when stable releases cross a year boundary, or
>> when there are several ones in a week. The stable release should
>> only be a counter, not a date.
>> Willy
> If there are more stable releases in a week, you could put a release counter
> after a dash, say :[2...X]
> If stable continues to be used and leaps over to next year, put another .yy.ww
> section :
> OK I know that's long, but easy to expand if needed, just be sure to separate
> date pieces with dots and counters with dashes. Or...
> maybe use them the other way round - the current scheme uses counters separated
> by dots, so maybe the new could do ss.yy-ww-tt[[-yy]-ww][.X]] ? Like
> 2.08-30-40.2 ? 2.08-30-09-02.2 ? But this seems odd, even to me ;)

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-07-21 11:19    [W:0.058 / U:2.440 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site