Re: [kernel.org users] XZ Migration discussion

[Harald Arnesen]

Matthew Wilcox <matthew@xxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:03:26AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> > 3* Create a new subdirectory for every 2.6.x kernel, and move all the
>> > related files there. This would shrink the main index drastically, and
>> > each subdirectory would have a reasonable size (except maybe 2.6.16 and
>> > 2.6.27.) Oddly enough this has been done for the files under testing/
>> > already, so I am curious why we don't do it for the release files (and
>> > the testing/incr/ files, while we're at it.)
>> 
>> Well, part of the reason why is that we're functionally "stuck" on 2.6;
>> a prefix which really has lost all meaning.
>> 
>> It might open up the question if we shouldn't just do a Solaris and drop
>> the leading 2 (so the next kernel would be 6.33) or call the kernel
>> after that 3.0 instead of 2.6.34, and then 3.1 instead of 2.6.35.
>
> Damn, we forgot to have that fight at Kernel Summit last year.
>
> I'm in favour of the 3.0 / 3.1 / 3.2 with stable@ being responsible for
> 3.0.1, 3.0.2, 3.1.1, etc.

Like I suggested in October 2008, but it would have been more natural at
that time:

<http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122418454113793&w=2>
-- 
Hilsen Harald.
--
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/