RE: Kernel release numbering
From: Sven-Haegar Koch
Date: Wed Mar 02 2005 - 20:45:12 EST
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.
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 http://www.cygnus.com/~gnu/)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/