Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 00:45:23 +0100
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, jgarzik@pobox.com, torvalds@osdl.org,
       davem@davemloft.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering
Message-ID: <20050303234523.GS8880@opteron.random>
References: <42268F93.6060504@pobox.com> <4226969E.5020101@pobox.com> <20050302205826.523b9144.davem@davemloft.net> <4226C235.1070609@pobox.com> <20050303080459.GA29235@kroah.com> <4226CA7E.4090905@pobox.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0503030750420.25732@ppc970.osdl.org> <422751C1.7030607@pobox.com> <20050303181122.GB12103@kroah.com> <20050303151752.00527ae7.akpm@osdl.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20050303151752.00527ae7.akpm@osdl.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 743
Lines: 14

On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 03:17:52PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> That's the only way it _can_ work.  The maintainer of 2.6.x.y shouldn't be

Andrew, what about my suggestion of shifting left x.y of 8 bits? ;) Do
we risk the magic 2.7 number to get us stuck in unstable mode for 2
years instead of 2 months? Doesn't 2.6.x.y pose the same risk but
by also breaking the numbering and the stable kernel identification for
no good reason? (ignoring the "2.6." part that carries no useful info
anymore ;)
-
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/