Re: The naming wars continue...

From: Bill Davidsen
Date: Tue Oct 26 2004 - 16:34:37 EST


Linus Torvalds wrote:

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Bill Davidsen wrote:

I do agree that the pre and rc names gave a strong hint that (-pre) new features would be considered or (-rc) it's worth doing more serious testing.


Well, I actually do try to _explain_ in the kernel mailing list annoucements what it going on.

One of the reasons I don't like "-rcX" vs "-preX" is that they are so meaningless. In contrast, when I actually do the write-up on a patch, I tend to explain what I expect to have changed, and if I feel we're getting ready for a release, I'll say something like

..

Ok,
trying to make ready for the real 2.6.9 in a week or so, so please give
this a beating, and if you have pending patches, please hold on to them
for a bit longer, until after the 2.6.9 release. It would be good to have
a 2.6.9 that doesn't need a dot-release immediately ;)

....

which is a hell of a lot more descriptive, in my opinion.

Which is just another reason why the name itself is not that meaningful. It can never carry the kind of information that people seem to _expect_ it to carry.

I wasn't going to reply to this since it's your call and I've had my say, but since several others have, let me throw out one more idea on the off chance you like it:

Stop doing the pre's on the next version! After 2.6.10 comes 2.6.10.1 etc, which everyone can see are incremental changes to 2.6.10, and when you really mean it, then put out 2.6.11-rc1.

Did that strike a nerve?

--
-bill davidsen (davidsen@xxxxxxx)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me
-
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/