Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754522AbYJTS4A (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:56:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752229AbYJTSzw (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:55:52 -0400 Received: from bytemail.bytemark.co.uk ([80.68.81.165]:53677 "EHLO bytemail.bytemark.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751902AbYJTSzv (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:55:51 -0400 Message-ID: <48FCD421.2010208@bytemark.co.uk> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:55:29 +0100 From: Alex Howells User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexandre Oliva CC: "H. Peter Anvin" , Greg KH , Alan Cox , Adrian Bunk , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change References: <20081016002509.GA25868@kroah.com> <20081016124943.GE23630@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20081016151748.GA31075@kroah.com> <20081016153053.GJ5834@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <20081016154726.GA6331@kroah.com> <20081016171626.GB22554@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20081017040239.GB28188@kroah.com> <20081017103138.1ca68d17@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <48F8C000.8030003@kernel.org> <20081017174226.GF2221@kroah.com> <48F98DE2.8030205@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1630 Lines: 35 Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Not that I care one way or the other. It's just that I don't see how > your response bears any relationship with the point Greg made. It's > just a distraction. We're talking about how to label releases, not > about guessing the release date of a kernel months ahead. One you > label it, it stays that way. Greg, I do agree with you that kernel numbering is becoming increasingly cumbersome now the numbers are becoming larger, and a spreadsheet is becoming a handy tool for tracking all this release information. I'm honestly not sold on any of the naming schemes proposed thusfar, but since I can't come up with a magic solution, I'll shut up about that! What I'd love to see any changes integrate would be a simple way to spot -stable releases in the version number (ie: 2.6.16, 2.6.27, those maintained for a "long" time and hopefully by 2.6.16.50+ quite 'bug free') versus the rest of releases sent out on a more regular basis. I'll immediately concede this is probably of minimal benefit to distribution maintainers who're actively following LKML and development in general, but there is a big community of folks out there using vanilla kernel.org sources for their own needs who, like me, probably find it difficult/frustrating to pick a kernel version these days. Does anyone have a suggestion how that could be accomplished? Alex -- 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/