Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:48:37 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
To: el es <el_es_cr@yahoo.co.uk>
cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Kernel version : what about s.yy.ww.tt scheme ?
In-Reply-To: <loom.20080717T083755-676@post.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.1.10.0807171140030.18697@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
References: <loom.20080717T083755-676@post.gmane.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (LNX 962 2008-03-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1405
Lines: 34


On Thursday 2008-07-17 10:51, el es wrote:

>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.

Interesting idea.

>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).

-stable usually overlaps with master. But I don't like version
numbers long as binutils and "2.8.30.9.01" have.

(BTW, IMHO it needs more than just a BKL removal to warrant a jump to 3.x)
--
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/