Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:26:19 +0200
From: markus reichelt <ml@mareichelt.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change
In-reply-to: <20081016002509.GA25868@kroah.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Mail-followup-to: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Message-id: <20081016142619.GA3756@tatooine.rebelbase.local>
Organization: still stuck in reorganization mode
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary=cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM
Content-disposition: inline
References: <20081016002509.GA25868@kroah.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1235
Lines: 42


--cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:

> So, as someone who constantly is dealing with kernel version
> numbers all the time with the -stable trees, our current numbering
> scheme is a pain a times.  How about this proposal instead?

Why not just keep it? It has worked so far, and from a strictly
end-user point of view I cannot see any advantages at all with a new
scheme. The ideas mentioned so far don't cut it either.

Just my heretic 2 cents,
S.

PS: Nice timing, thunderstorm approaching.

--=20
In Russia, President kills Financial Crisis

--cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkj3TwsACgkQLMyTO8Kj/uQ86wCfVPZHTqFe3RHuvoaixCEE4E4g
ffkAoIdk2NfFnC1J/FnHN8UCjTktLm4x
=GKLb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM--
--
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/