From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:58:41 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9
Cc: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@nokia.com>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
       Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
       Steven Noonan <steven@uplinklabs.net>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20081017034717.GA28188@kroah.com> <20081020205400.GB26744@gandalf.research.nokia.com> <20081020210648.GA30389@kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <20081020210648.GA30389@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200810202358.42050.arnd@arndb.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1046
Lines: 26

On Monday 20 October 2008, Greg KH wrote:
> Um, did you not get the memo 3 years ago saying we are changing our
> development model and there will not be a 2.7 development series?

Well, in theory we could resume the old numbering scheme again but
keep the current development model, in effect just inflating the
version numbers by one level:

2.6.28-rc1 -> 2.7.0
2.6.28-rc2 -> 2.7.1
2.6.28     -> 2.8.0 (perfect -- I've heard people informally call it
                     the two-eight release in the past instead of
                     two-six-twenty-eight)
2.6.28.1   -> 2.8.1
2.6.29-rc1 -> 2.9.0
2.6.29     -> 2.10.0 or 3.0.0 (depending on your taste)

This would be entirely consistent with how things have been since 1.0,
except that we have not had a 2.odd release in a long time.

	Arnd <><
--
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/