[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <234909.335371287999912985.JavaMail.root@mail-zbox20.bo3.lycos.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 05:45:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Artem S. Tashkinov" <t.artem@...os.com>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc: kevin granade <kevin.granade@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: On Linux numbering scheme
----- "Tejun Heo" wrote:
> 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
That's my point. "2.6" prefix is totally meaningless nowadays. I just
want to rejuvenate the numbering scheme and make it easy to understand
and comprehend. What's the difference between .16 and .36? Besides, I
just think these huge numbers look unsightly. Do you know any other
piece of software which has the same huge numbers?
--
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