Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757921AbYJQStP (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:49:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755120AbYJQSsr (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:48:47 -0400 Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:38527 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754399AbYJQSsp (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:48:45 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 10:40:52 -0700 From: Greg KH To: "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change Message-ID: <20081017174052.GD2221@kroah.com> References: <20081016002509.GA25868@kroah.com> <48F88923.30109@cateee.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48F88923.30109@cateee.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1707 Lines: 48 On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 02:46:27PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > Greg KH wrote: >> We number the kernel based on the year, and the numbers of releases we >> have done this year: >> YEAR.NUMBER.MINOR_RELEASE >> For example, the first release in 2009 would be called: >> 2009.0.0 >> The second: >> 2009.1.0 >> If we want to be a bit more "non-zero-counting" friendly: we can start >> at "1" for the number: >> 2009.1.0 for the first release >> 2009.2.0 for the second. >> Then the stable releases can increment the minor number: >> 2009.1.1 for the first stable release >> 2009.1.2 for the second. >> and so on. >> Benefits of this is it more accuratly represents to people just how old >> the kernel they are currently running is (2.6.9 would be have been >> 2004.9.0 on this naming scheme.) >> Yes, we can handle the major/minor macros in the kernel to provide a >> compatible number so that automated scripts will not break, that's not a >> big deal. >> Any thoughts? > > What about: > - rc releases: a 2009.5.0-rc4 become suddenly 2010.0.0-rc5 ? Sure, what's the big deal? > - a stable version in January of a kernel released in December > still has the old year? (I hope yes, but it could confuse users.) stable versions would not modify the year. > - when (if) we need a big innovative (or incompatible) kernel > change, how to mark old and new kernels? Based on our current development model, this isn't an issue. thanks, greg k-h -- 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/