linux-kernel - Re: On Linux numbering scheme

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

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/