To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From: el es <el_es_cr@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Kernel version : what about s.yy.ww.tt scheme ?
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:51:19 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <loom.20080717T083755-676@post.gmane.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1384
Lines: 31

Hello,
inspired by the bikeshed painting contest, I got the following idea :

The scheme to be s.yy.ww.tt, that is :

s - series, as it is now (freedom to Linus to bump it to 3 when BKL is removed
for example ;) )

yy - two (in a hundred years, three) digits of the year

Now the interesting part begins which is

ww - the number of the week of the release. This will be between 1 and 52 (53)

tt - the number of the week of stable release. As above.

I see it like :

Take a hypotetical new-scheme 2.8.30 release (roughly the current 2.6.26, didn't
count these weeks). Linus starts to accumulate patches for 2.8.30-rcX as usual,
and when he is ready to release, puts the release week number instead of 30 -
let's assume it is a 2.8.40 then, more or less. By the time, the stable team
produces 2.8.30.[32,34,36,38,40 and so on]. If the weeks leap into the next
year, stable team puts e.g. 2.8.30.9.01 (yy.ww). This scheme would reflect the
fast pace of development quite good, and also have the information, when the
code in question was produced actually. I think the weekly granularity is quite
good idea anyway.

What do you think ?


--
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/