Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932938Ab1EXSzw (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 14:55:52 -0400 Received: from mail.lang.hm ([64.81.33.126]:58155 "EHLO bifrost.lang.hm" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932722Ab1EXSzu (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 14:55:50 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 11:55:27 -0700 (PDT) From: david@lang.hm X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: Matthias Schniedermeyer cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder In-Reply-To: <20110524183405.GA14493@citd.de> Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110524183405.GA14493@citd.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1964 Lines: 49 On Tue, 24 May 2011, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: > On 23.05.2011 13:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > What about strictly 3 part versions? Just add a .0. > > 3.0.0 - Release Kernel 3.0 > 3.0.1 - Stable 1 > 3.0.2 - Stable 2 > 3.1.0 - Release Kernel 3.1 > 3.1.1 - Stable 1 > ... > > Biggest problem is likely version phobics that get pimples when they see > trailing zeros. ;-) since there are always issues discovered with a new kernel is released (which is why the -stable kernels exist), being wary of .0 kernels is not neccessarily a bad thing. I still think a date based approach would be the best. since people are worried about not knowing when a final release will happen, base the date on when the merge window opened or closed (always known at the time of the first -rc kernel) in the thread on lwn, people pointed out that the latest 2.6.32 kernel would still be a 2009.12.X which doesn't reflect the fact that it was released this month. My suggestion for that is to make the X be the number of months (or years.months if you don't like large month values) between the merge window and the release of the -stable release. This would lead to a small problem when there are multiple -stable releases in a month, but since that doesn't last very long I don't see a real problem with just incramenting the month into the future in those cases. David Lang -- 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/