[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081017214409.GB3585@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:44:09 -0700
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Steven Noonan <steven@...inklabs.net>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 08:47:23PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > And that's my point here, do we want to change the current numbering
> > scheme as people have expressed annoyances of the current one.
>
> But any new scheme will be just as annoying to someone and it messes up
> existing documentation, understanding and risks breaking third party
> tools.
>
> Is it really worth the hassle, plus we'll have to change again if we use
> date/times because once we are shipping Linux out to Alpha Centauri with
> colonists there will be serious problems trying to compute the effect of
> tau on release numbering ...
Sure, but by then, the 2.6.521 release will be out and we could fix it
up by finally going to 3.0 :)
Seriously, am I the only one that is getting annoyed by our version
numbers? If so, I can live with it, but I got the feeling that I wasn't
alone here.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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