[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CC548F8.1090307@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:08:08 +0200
From: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
CC: kevin granade <kevin.granade@...il.com>,
"Artem S. Tashkinov" <t.artem@...os.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: On Linux numbering scheme
On 10/22/2010 04:00 AM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 07:06:23PM -0500, kevin granade wrote:
>
>> Any particular reason not to continue the date-oriented format and
>> have the third number be the numerical representation of the month
>> rather than an incrementing numbering of the releases? It would still
>> be monotonically increasing, which is the only requirement, right?
>
> Why do we need to change it, anyway?
Agreed. These days, I use just the last digit, as in kernel 36, in
casual contexts. It's a number as good as any other. I don't think
it needs to be changed actively. If the 2.6. prefix is bothering,
just use the last number and maybe that will become semi-official in
the future, or maybe not. Doesn't really matter.
--
tejun
--
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