From: Bernd Eckenfels <ecki-news2004-12@lina.inka.de>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: starting with 2.7
Organization: Deban GNU/Linux Homesite
In-Reply-To: <20050104155844.GI2708@holomorphy.com>
User-Agent: tin/1.7.6-20040906 ("Baleshare") (UNIX) (Linux/2.6.8.1 (i686))
Message-Id: <E1ClsdF-00027q-00@calista.eckenfels.6bone.ka-ip.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 18:38:09 +0100
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1029
Lines: 23

In article <20050104155844.GI2708@holomorphy.com> you wrote:
> You could in principle base version numbers on external influences. In a
> 5-point decimal system, then 2.6.x.y.z would be released daily, 2.6.x.y.0
> released every 10 days, 2.6.x.0.0 released every 100 days, and 2.7.0.0.0
> released after 1000 days, and so on.

the age does, however not say anything about the intention and preparations.
The version numbers are mainly to communicate intention. Otherwise you can
use a timestamp.

And thats why I dont think it is good to keep innovations back by not
opening a 2.7 tree nor is it good to caue trouble for users by merging a lot
of new features to 2.6.

A lot of media and books has explained the linux numbering scheme, this is
valuable knowledge, dont dump it.

Bernd
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/