[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <487D7781.6000407@keyaccess.nl>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 06:22:25 +0200
From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stoyan Gaydarov <stoyboyker@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
gorcunov@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: From 2.4 to 2.6 to 2.7?
On 15-07-08 20:04, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Clearly, the 2. prefix has long outlived its usefulness as far as Linux
> is concerned, and probably the 6 as well.
Been calling the -stable branches v20, v21, v22, ... here.
I do believe the numbering scheme should at least ostensibly still be
feature driven, not be a fully robotic date thing. With the latter, you
definitely miss out on press-opportunities and that's not even meant
cynical. There just is a bit of industry around Linux and the promotion
opportunities of (say) "Linux 3" are really lots, lots bigger than
anything boringly date based.
That even holds for things like books -- I just bet that a "all new,
covers Linux 3!" blurp on the cover sells lots more copies than a "all
new, covers the march 21st 2009 version of Linux!" one.
But yes, the current monotic increase is definitely getting a bit boring
as well. The kernel as of 2.6.26 is quite different from the kernel that
was known as 2.6.0 so just be creative I'd say and set a 2.8 goal. Next
version can be 2.9 (should be clear enough by then) and then watch world
domination happen with the big 3.0 release.
Linux 2010.5? Boooooooooring....
Rene.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists