Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> Why not just disguard this sillyness of alphabetic characters in version
> numbers... Just carry through the same structure used by major/minor:
>
Think this would be a superior naming-scheme.
However there are 2 audiences for the naming-scheme:
1. The developers, hackers (good scheme)
2. Users, Those who compile the kernel (bad scheme)
The naming-scheme you propose would make most sence for the first
category.. but for the second (and I speak for myself).. they would not
know that a X.X.X.2.1 would be RC1.
And one big part of changing the naming-scheme would be to get enough
users to try out the proposed kernel to eliminate big bugs like in
2.4.15 and 2.4.11.
Perhaps it is a PR-issue?
Then of course there is the matter of freezing development in a RC.. but
that can be done no matter what kind of naming-scheme you use.
Best regards
Per-Olof Pettersson