From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 12:13:29 -0700 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel Cc: Greg KH , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org So I've been busily merging stuff, and just wanted to send out a quick reminder that I warned people in the 39 announcement that this might be a slightly shorter merge window than usual, so that I can avoid having to make the -rc1 release from Japan using my slow laptop (doing "allyesconfig" builds on that thing really isn't in the cards, and I like to do those to verify things - even if we've already had a few cases where arch include differences made it less than effective in finding problems). And judging by the merge window so far, that early close (probably Sunday - I'll be on airplanes next Monday) looks rather likely. I already seem to have a fairly sizable portion of linux-next in my tree, and there haven't been any huge upsets. So anybody who was planning a last-minute "please pull" - this is a heads-up. Don't do it, you might miss the window entirely. Did I miss any major development mailing lists with stuff pending? Linus PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to do things, I listen. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 21:20:56 +0200 Message-ID: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org * Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. > I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going > to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to do > things, I listen. I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 12:22:56 -0700 Message-ID: <20110523192256.GA18935@suse.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:13:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. If you do this, I will buy you a bottle of whatever whiskey you want that I can get my hands on in Tokyo next week. {crosses fingers} greg k-h -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 21:25:25 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:34210 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933465Ab1EWTZ3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 15:25:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Greg KH , Andrew Morton On Mon, 23 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. So the voices tell you to avoid .42 ? Thanks, tglx From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 00:04:08 +0400 Message-ID: <1306181049.2442.1.camel@mulgrave.site> References: <20110523192256.GA18935@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110523192256.GA18935@suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Greg KH Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 12:22 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:13:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. > > If you do this, I will buy you a bottle of whatever whiskey you want > that I can get my hands on in Tokyo next week. I can recommend Hanyu Ace of Spades ... I can even arrange to be on hand just to make sure it's as good as it should be ... James -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 13:21:26 -0700 Message-ID: <20110523132126.3f6ead5f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Greg KH , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 23 May 2011 21:25:25 +0200 (CEST) Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. > > So the voices tell you to avoid .42 ? They tell him to avoid the question to which 42 is the answer. --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 13:33:48 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than the fourth one. But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a fairly nice round number. There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. But we'll see. Linus -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Zaytsev Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 00:52:14 +0400 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-qw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.216.46]:50395 "EHLO mail-qw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752532Ab1EWUwP (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 16:52:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 00:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. > > But we'll see. Maybe, 2011.x, or 11.x, x increasing for every merge window started this year? This would better reflect the steady nature of the releases, but would certainly break a lot of scripts. ;) From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 17:02:38 -0400 Message-ID: <20110523210238.GB10792@home.goodmis.org> References: <20110523132126.3f6ead5f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523132126.3f6ead5f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Greg KH , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:21:26PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > They tell him to avoid the question to which 42 is the answer. What 2.6 Linux kernel version was the last before 3.0? -- Steve -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oliver Pinter Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 23:59:17 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:60944 "EHLO mail-wy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752149Ab1EWV7S (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 17:59:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On 5/23/11, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) I think, the best time for this, after reorganize the ARM arch folder / tree. > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. > > But we'll see. > > Linus > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 15:21:21 -0700 Message-ID: <20110523222121.GD12777@suse.de> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:53873 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751777Ab1EWWla (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 18:41:30 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. I like that, it would make things much easier for me to keep track of stuff. > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. That sounds reasonable as well. greg k-h From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "jonsmirl@gmail.com" Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 19:10:21 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: Received: from mail-iw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:35288 "EHLO mail-iw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752283Ab1EWXKW (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 19:10:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. Could we set a goal of having 3.0 be the first release with a totally cleaned up ARM arch? That would give everyone a good target to work towards. -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@gmail.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ted Ts'o Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 19:17:21 -0400 Message-ID: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different from what we have now. - Ted -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:21:43 -0700 Message-ID: <20110523162143.fdf2f2a7.rdunlap@xenotime.net> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from oproxy7-pub.bluehost.com ([67.222.55.9]:54072 "HELO oproxy7-pub.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1755733Ab1EWXVr (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 19:21:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ted Ts'o Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On Mon, 23 May 2011 19:17:21 -0400 Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. It's just another little thing to break several scripts... --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:23:20 -0700 Message-ID: <4DDAEC68.30803__9149.90520473129$1306193054$gmane$org@zytor.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:60455 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755773Ab1EWXYG (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 19:24:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ted Ts'o , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.ker On 05/23/2011 04:17 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. > That sounds like a good thing. -hpa From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:33:12 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Ted Ts'o , Greg KH , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , linux-mm , linux-fsdevel , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also numbers" transition much more natural. Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development trees. But if I do 3.0, then I'd be chucking that whole thing out the window, and the next release would be 3.1, 3.2, etc.. And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just do 4.0 etc. Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 17:40:04 -0600 Message-ID: <20110523234003.GC26392@parisc-linux.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523222121.GD12777@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523222121.GD12777@suse.de> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Greg KH Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 03:21:21PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > I like that, it would make things much easier for me to keep track of > stuff. As long as 3.14 turns into a long-term support kernel and gets up to 159 ... In all serious, I'm very supportive of this move. I'm heartily sick of people claiming "we have version 2.6 support" when they really mean they haven't updated since version 2.6.9. Yeah, congratulations, you're seven years out of date. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phil Turmel Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 19:53:56 -0400 Message-ID: <4DDAF394.7050405@turmel.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org Hi Linus, On 05/23/2011 04:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. A few months ago, I briefly considered suggesting that the demise of the BKL would be a suitable milestone for the numbering shakeup. But I am a mere mortal lurker, and I remember past flame-fests this topic spawned. So I chickened out. As a small-scale linux evangelist, I would sure like to skip the explanation of the version numbers. Phil -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 04:01:35 +0200 Message-ID: <20110524020135.GA19249@elte.hu> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org * Linus Torvalds wrote: > Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of > 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also > numbers" transition much more natural. Yeah, it sounds really good to get rid of the (meanwhile) meaningless "2.6." prefix from our version code and iterate it in a more meaningful way. I suspect the stable team and distros will enjoy the more meaningful third digit as well: it will raise the perceived importance of stabilization and packaging work. Btw., we should probably remove the fourth (patch) level, otherwise distros might feel tempted to fill it in with their own patch-stack version number, which would result in confusing "3.3.1.5" meaning different things on different distros - while 3.3.1-5.rpm style of distro kernel package naming denotes the distro patch level more clearly. I don't think the odd/even history will linger too long: in practice we'll iterate through 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 rather quickly, in the first year, so any residual notion of stable/unstable will be gone within a few iterations. > Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - > there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development > trees. But if I do 3.0, then I'd be chucking that whole thing out the > window, and the next release would be 3.1, 3.2, etc.. > > And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, > so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just > do 4.0 etc. Perhaps we could do 4.0 once the last bit of -rt hits upstream? /me ducks > Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these > days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly > fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. They are very stable releases as far as i'm concerned - i can pretty confidently run and use -rc2 and better kernels on my boxes these days and could do so for the past few years. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 04:11:39 +0200 Message-ID: <20110524021139.GB19249@elte.hu> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org * Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. Also, in all fairness, we should probably display a certain amount of humility: while Linux has certainly reached milestones such as world domination (as far as large and small computers are concerned), so calling it 3.0 is a fair deal, we probably have to wait for version 42.0 before we can consider the Linux kernel to be the ultimate answer to life, universe and everything. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 09:55:42 +0200 Message-ID: <201105240955.43229.arnd@arndb.de> References: <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Ted Ts'o , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 24 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of > 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also > numbers" transition much more natural. > > Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - > there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development > trees. But if I do 3.0, then I'd be chucking that whole thing out the > window, and the next release would be 3.1, 3.2, etc.. I like that. While I don't really care if you call it 2.7, 2.8 or 3.0 (or 4.0 even, if you want to keep continuity following .38 and .39), the current 2.5/2.6 numbering cycle is almost 10 years old and has obviously lost all significance. The only reason I can see that would make it worthwhile waiting for is if the enterprise and embedded people were to decide on a common longterm kernel and call that e.g. 2.7.x or 2.8.x while you continue with 2.9.x or 3.0.x or 3.x. My impression is however that the next longterm release is still one or two years away, so probably not worth waiting for and hard to estimate in advance. > Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these > days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly > fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. We still have stable and unstable releases, except that you call the unstable ones -rcX and they are all nice and short, unlike the infamous 2.1.xxx series ;-) IMHO simply changing the names from 2.6.40-rcX to 2.7.X and from 2.6.40.X to 2.6.8.X etc would be the most straightforward change if you want to save the 3.0 release for a special moment. Enough bike shedding from my side, please just make a decision. Arnd -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Engelhardt Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 14:15:13 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Ted Ts'o , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , "linux-mm Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of >2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also >numbers" transition much more natural. > >Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - >there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development >trees. .oO(Though once 2.{7 or more, odd} trickle into the distros, it would become pretty much apparent that they are not devel.) >And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, >so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just >do 4.0 etc. While 2.6 has certainly worn out, already thinking of a 4.0 is highly reminiscient of the version number arms race Firefox and ChromeBrowser are doing currently. >Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these >days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly >fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. If I remember past-time discussions right, ELF was the contributing factor to bump the major number to 2.0 back then; ever since 2.0, no similarly breakthrough-ing event has occurred. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jacek Luczak Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 14:30:59 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:63050 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754003Ab1EXMa7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 08:30:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Linus Torvalds , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ted Ts'o , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , "linux-mm : > On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >>Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of >>2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also >>numbers" transition much more natural. >> >>Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - >>there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development >>trees. > > .oO(Though once 2.{7 or more, odd} trickle into the distros, it would > become pretty much apparent that they are not devel.) > >>And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, >>so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just >>do 4.0 etc. > > While 2.6 has certainly worn out, already thinking of a 4.0 is highly > reminiscient of the version number arms race Firefox and ChromeBrowser > are doing currently. > >>Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these >>days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly >>fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. > > If I remember past-time discussions right, ELF was the contributing > factor to bump the major number to 2.0 back then; ever since 2.0, no > similarly breakthrough-ing event has occurred. What then about BKL removal? Nice place to celebrate with version jump and heaving some beers. -Jacek From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Engelhardt Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:02:33 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from seven.medozas.de ([188.40.89.202]:51368 "EHLO seven.medozas.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756112Ab1EXNCe (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 09:02:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Jacek Luczak Cc: Linus Torvalds , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ted Ts'o , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , "linux-mm 2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt : >> On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >>>Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of >>>2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also >>>numbers" transition much more natural. >>> >>>Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - >>>there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development >>>trees. >> >> .oO(Though once 2.{7 or more, odd} trickle into the distros, it would >> become pretty much apparent that they are not devel.) >> >>>And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, >>>so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just >>>do 4.0 etc. >> >> While 2.6 has certainly worn out, already thinking of a 4.0 is highly >> reminiscient of the version number arms race Firefox and ChromeBrowser >> are doing currently. >> >>>Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these >>>days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly >>>fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. >> >> If I remember past-time discussions right, ELF was the contributing >> factor to bump the major number to 2.0 back then; ever since 2.0, no >> similarly breakthrough-ing event has occurred. > >What then about BKL removal? Nice place to celebrate with version jump >and heaving some beers. The BKL going away was not a change that would require new userspace programs. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jacek Luczak Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:18:39 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:60643 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756109Ab1EXNSk (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 09:18:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Linus Torvalds , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ted Ts'o , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , "linux-mm : > On Tuesday 2011-05-24 14:30, Jacek Luczak wrote: > >>2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt : >>> On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: >>> >>>>Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of >>>>2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also >>>>numbers" transition much more natural. >>>> >>>>Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - >>>>there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development >>>>trees. >>> >>> .oO(Though once 2.{7 or more, odd} trickle into the distros, it would >>> become pretty much apparent that they are not devel.) >>> >>>>And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, >>>>so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just >>>>do 4.0 etc. >>> >>> While 2.6 has certainly worn out, already thinking of a 4.0 is highly >>> reminiscient of the version number arms race Firefox and ChromeBrowser >>> are doing currently. >>> >>>>Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these >>>>days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly >>>>fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. >>> >>> If I remember past-time discussions right, ELF was the contributing >>> factor to bump the major number to 2.0 back then; ever since 2.0, no >>> similarly breakthrough-ing event has occurred. >> >>What then about BKL removal? Nice place to celebrate with version jump >>and heaving some beers. > > The BKL going away was not a change that would require new > userspace programs. True but as you I guess - kind off - notice there's no such event that would launch fireworks and we get features smoothly. By that then we should celebrate killing old nightmares aka BKL. It's more like - lets not find the reason but include one just to feel better. At the end the simplified version convention is the best reason to do this cut off. I even plan to send a truck full of chickens to Linus if this will convince him :) Then, while describing new kernel deployment, I won't need to pronounce the cool sounding - ,,Mika so I've now installed two(dot)six(dot)thirty-five(dot)forty-one(dash)one version.'' Cheers, -Jacek From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:41:37 +0100 Message-ID: <20110524154137.5ab5e110@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Ted Ts'o Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , linux-mm , linux-fsdevel , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. I think I prefer 3 digits. Otherwise we will have to pass 3.0, 3.1 and 3.11 all of which numbers still give older sysadmins flashbacks and will have them waking screaming in the middle of the night. Also saves breaking all the tools and assumptions people have been used to for some many years Alan -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:43:48 +0100 Message-ID: <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jacek Luczak Cc: Jan Engelhardt , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "linux-mm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly horror back from the dead. Alan From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ralf Baechle Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:48:39 +0100 Message-ID: <20110524144839.GC30117__32500.0185207047$1306248573$gmane$org@linux-mips.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from h5.dl5rb.org.uk ([81.2.74.5]:50471 "EHLO duck.linux-mips.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752662Ab1EXOtX (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 10:49:23 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ted Ts'o , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.ker On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 07:17:21PM -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. It will require another bunch of changes to scripts that try to make sense out of kernel Linux version numbers. It's a minor issue and we might be better off doing something else than version number magic. Not last a new major version number raises expectations - whatever those might be. Ralf From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "jonsmirl@gmail.com" Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 11:07:45 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Jacek Luczak , Jan Engelhardt , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "linux-mm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox wrote: > Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big > version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in > git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly > horror back from the dead. 2.8 could mark the beginning of the great cleanup --- work out the details of what needs to be cleaned and set a goal --- remove old buses/driver, switch to device tree, graphics, 32/64 merges, etc 3.0 would mark its completion -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@gmail.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ralf Baechle Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 16:46:27 +0100 Message-ID: <20110524154626.GD30117@linux-mips.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from h5.dl5rb.org.uk ([81.2.74.5]:59355 "EHLO duck.linux-mips.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752104Ab1EXPqd (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 11:46:33 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alan Cox Cc: Jacek Luczak , Jan Engelhardt , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 03:43:48PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big > version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in > git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly > horror back from the dead. Dunno about MCA but I doubt we can kill all of (E)ISA. i8253, i8259 and a few others still refuse hard to die. Is it worth to setup a system to track success / failure reports for drivers and ditch drivers once there are no success reports for a driver for too long? It may not be a good idea - people tend not report success much more rarely than failure. (On that matter, I wonder if there are 5.25" USB floppy drives ...) Ralf From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Engelhardt Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 19:29:48 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20110524154626.GD30117@linux-mips.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from seven.medozas.de ([188.40.89.202]:58248 "EHLO seven.medozas.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752210Ab1EXR3t (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 13:29:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110524154626.GD30117@linux-mips.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ralf Baechle Cc: Alan Cox , Jacek Luczak , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds On Tuesday 2011-05-24 17:46, Ralf Baechle wrote: >On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 03:43:48PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > >> Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big >> version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in >> git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly >> horror back from the dead. > >Dunno about MCA but I doubt we can kill all of (E)ISA. i8253, i8259 and a >few others still refuse hard to die. > >Is it worth to setup a system to track success / failure reports for >drivers and ditch drivers once there are no success reports for a driver >for too long? It may not be a good idea - people tend not report success >much more rarely than failure. > >(On that matter, I wonder if there are 5.25" USB floppy drives ...) If there were, they would appear as Mass Storage devices (at least the 3.5" USB floppy gadgets do), and as such, don't depend on ISA or the classic floppy driver at all. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 10:36:17 -0700 Message-ID: <4DDBEC91.8020004@zytor.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: "jonsmirl@gmail.com" Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-mm , Jan Engelhardt , Jacek Luczak , DRI , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On 05/24/2011 08:07 AM, jonsmirl@gmail.com wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox wrote: >> Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big >> version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in >> git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly >> horror back from the dead. > > 2.8 could mark the beginning of the great cleanup > --- work out the details of what needs to be cleaned and set a goal > --- remove old buses/driver, switch to device tree, graphics, 32/64 > merges, etc > 3.0 would mark its completion > I think this whole discussion misses the essence of the new development model, which is that we no longer do these kinds of feature-based major milestones. If we want to to deprecate lots of drivers (which I personally would advocate against -- I have built systems specifically to run a real floppy drive since the Linux floppy driver is amazingly flexible and can read/write a lot of formats that nothing else can, including USB floppies) then we should do that in the normal course of action, incrementally, and listed in feature-removal-schedule.txt, not all at once due to some arbitrary milestone. We have found it works better this way. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 10:41:04 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <4DDBEC91.8020004@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:41244 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753911Ab1EXRl2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 13:41:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4DDBEC91.8020004@zytor.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: "jonsmirl@gmail.com" , Alan Cox , Jacek Luczak , Jan Engelhardt , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm , Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , linux-fsdevel On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:36 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > I think this whole discussion misses the essence of the new development > model, which is that we no longer do these kinds of feature-based major > milestones. Indeed. It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever. So a renumbering would be purely about dropping the numbers to something smaller and more easily recognized. The ABI wouldn't change. The API wouldn't change. There wouldn't be any big "because we finally did xyz". Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lisa Milne Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 04:06:27 +1000 Message-ID: <20110525040627.753980f8.lisa@ltmnet.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. How about stardates? That'd make a release made now 64860.8 I really should sleep more... -- Lisa Milne -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthias Schniedermeyer Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 20:34:05 +0200 Message-ID: <20110524183405.GA14493@citd.de> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On 23.05.2011 13:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. What about strictly 3 part versions? Just add a .0. 3.0.0 - Release Kernel 3.0 3.0.1 - Stable 1 3.0.2 - Stable 2 3.1.0 - Release Kernel 3.1 3.1.1 - Stable 1 ... Biggest problem is likely version phobics that get pimples when they see trailing zeros. ;-) Bis denn -- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: eschvoca Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 14:48:08 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <4DDBEC91.8020004@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: Received: from mail-vw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.212.46]:62371 "EHLO mail-vw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754446Ab1EXSsJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 14:48:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , "jonsmirl@gmail.com" , Alan Cox , Jacek Luczak , Jan Engelhardt , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm , Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , linux-fsdevel On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:36 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> >> I think this whole discussion misses the essence of the new development >> model, which is that we no longer do these kinds of feature-based major >> milestones. > > Indeed. > > It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever. > > So a renumbering would be purely about dropping the numbers to > something smaller and more easily recognized. The ABI wouldn't change. > The API wouldn't change. There wouldn't be any big "because we finally > did xyz". > Me, a nobody end user, would prefer a version number that corresponded to the date. Something like: %y.%m. %Y.%m. Then users would know the significance of the number and when a vendor says they support Linux 11.09 the user will immediately know if they are up to date. Using the date also clearly communicates it is not about features. When there is a 3.0 (4.0) release people expect big new features and API/ABI breakage. My 2 cents. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: david@lang.hm Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 11:55:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110524183405.GA14493@citd.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110524183405.GA14493@citd.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Matthias Schniedermeyer Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 24 May 2011, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: > On 23.05.2011 13:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > What about strictly 3 part versions? Just add a .0. > > 3.0.0 - Release Kernel 3.0 > 3.0.1 - Stable 1 > 3.0.2 - Stable 2 > 3.1.0 - Release Kernel 3.1 > 3.1.1 - Stable 1 > ... > > Biggest problem is likely version phobics that get pimples when they see > trailing zeros. ;-) since there are always issues discovered with a new kernel is released (which is why the -stable kernels exist), being wary of .0 kernels is not neccessarily a bad thing. I still think a date based approach would be the best. since people are worried about not knowing when a final release will happen, base the date on when the merge window opened or closed (always known at the time of the first -rc kernel) in the thread on lwn, people pointed out that the latest 2.6.32 kernel would still be a 2009.12.X which doesn't reflect the fact that it was released this month. My suggestion for that is to make the X be the number of months (or years.months if you don't like large month values) between the merge window and the release of the -stable release. This would lead to a small problem when there are multiple -stable releases in a month, but since that doesn't last very long I don't see a real problem with just incramenting the month into the future in those cases. David Lang -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Emil Langrock Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 21:06:47 +0200 Message-ID: <201105242106.47657.emil.langrock@gmx.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.23]:58333 "HELO mailout-de.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753777Ab1EXTGu (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 15:06:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , Greg KH , Andrew Morton Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. Correct :) I would still prefer the version number change to something like 2011.0 - already proposed at http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Kernel_Release_Numbering_Redux I don't think that it is reasonable to say that it is bad because third party scripts would break - they would break anyway (I would bet that many of them don't expect to see 3.x anyway). And changing now to 3.0 and then incrementing the second one everytime for 10 years will also lead to something like 3.56.7. I would also say that defining the release number using the time of the merge window start/end is easy understandable. "2.6.40" would be the third development cycle this year aka v2011.2 or v2011.2.0 when the patchlevel should always be included. -- Emil Langrock From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zimny Lech Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 22:59:12 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110525040627.753980f8.lisa@ltmnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110525040627.753980f8.lisa@ltmnet.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Lisa Milne Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org Hi, 2011/5/24 Lisa Milne : >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > How about stardates? This is a wonderful idea! :) > That'd make a release made now 64860.8 > > I really should sleep more... > > -- > Lisa Milne > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" i= n > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at =A0http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at =A0http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > --=20 Slawa! Zimny Lech z Wawelu -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Engelhardt Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 23:05:30 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <4DDBEC91.8020004@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from seven.medozas.de ([188.40.89.202]:41549 "EHLO seven.medozas.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753747Ab1EXVFc (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 17:05:32 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: eschvoca Cc: Linus Torvalds , "H. Peter Anvin" , "jonsmirl@gmail.com" , Alan Cox , Jacek Luczak , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm , Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , linux-fsdevel On Tuesday 2011-05-24 20:48, eschvoca wrote: >On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >> It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever. > >Using the date also clearly communicates it is not about features. On the contrary: Whenever a 2.6.x release was set out the door, there was at least one new feature in the cycle. Given the endless manpower that seems to trail Linux, that seems unlikely to change in the near term. On "It is not about features" - it is not /just/ about features - it is also about fixes, which are equally important, and they also warrant a version bump of some sort on their own. Pointing out the obvious, the stable serieses. "Fleeing" to date-based version numbering seems like an excuse for making way for releases without any change whatsoever. (IOW, if there were features/fixes, a non-date based scheme of incremental numbers could indicate them already.) >Me, a nobody end user, would prefer a version number that corresponded >to the date. Something like: > >%y.%m. >%Y.%m. Except that LINUX_KERNEL_VERSION has only 8 bits for each, so 2011 is out of range, which would need to kept in mind. And a 2-digit spec.. nah that does not feel very 100-year proof. (Just look at struct tm.tm_year for the mess 2-digits made technically.) >Then users would know the significance of the number and when a vendor >says they support Linux 11.09 the user will immediately know if they >are up to date. An added issue with that would be that numbers would not increase in same-sized steps anymore and leave gaps. (There would probably be no 11.06 between 11.05 aka 2.6.39 and 11.07-or-so aka 2.6.40) My 2=E5=86=86. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Lutomirski Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 17:25:10 -0400 Message-ID: <4DDC2236.6010608@mit.edu> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On 05/23/2011 04:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. > I don't think year-based versions (like 2011.0 for the first 2011 release, or maybe 2011.5 for May 2011) are pretty, but I'll make an argument for them anyway: it makes it easier to figure out when hardware ought to be supported. So if I buy a 2014-model laptop and the coffee-making button doesn't work, and my favorite distro is running the 2013 kernel, then I know I shouldn't expect to it to work. (Graphics drivers are probably a more realistic example.) Also, when someone in my lab installs on a box that's running software I wrote that needs to support modern high-speed peripherals, then I can say "What? You seriously expect this stuff to work on Linux 2007? Let's install a slightly less stable distro from at least 2010." This sounds a lot less nerdy than "What? You seriously expect this stuff to work on Linux 2.6.27? Let's install a slightly less stable distro that uses at least 2.6.36." --Andy -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Hans-Peter Jansen" Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 01:00:07 +0200 Message-ID: <201105250100.08708.hpj@urpla.net> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH , aufs-users@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Monday 23 May 2011, 22:33:48 Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 > > before cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. But hey, do you really want to release a Linux 3.0 kernel without serious layered filesystem functionality? Shame on you, Pete PS.: Sorry for being such a pest in this regard, but filesystem layering is one of the most important missing bits to excel out of the box in * live distros * diskless computing * flash based systems Even the linux based commercial PBX solution (mobydick), I bought, ships with it. PPS.: Bad timing, I know, but I'm glad, that Al is back to life again.. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 21:13:14 -0400 Message-ID: <6043.1306285994@localhost> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1306285994_4707P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]:35589 "EHLO lennier.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753979Ab1EYBOB (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 21:14:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 24 May 2011 14:30:59 +0200." Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Jacek Luczak Cc: Jan Engelhardt , Linus Torvalds , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ted Ts'o , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , "linux-mm 2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt : > > On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > >>Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of > >>2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also > >>numbers" transition much more natural. > >> > >>Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - > >>there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development > >>trees. > > > > .oO(Though once 2.{7 or more, odd} trickle into the distros, it would > > become pretty much apparent that they are not devel.) > > > >>And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, > >>so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just > >>do 4.0 etc. > > > > While 2.6 has certainly worn out, already thinking of a 4.0 is highly > > reminiscient of the version number arms race Firefox and ChromeBrowser > > are doing currently. > > > >>Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these > >>days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly > >>fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. > > > > If I remember past-time discussions right, ELF was the contributing > > factor to bump the major number to 2.0 back then; ever since 2.0, no > > similarly breakthrough-ing event has occurred. > > What then about BKL removal? Nice place to celebrate with version jump > and heaving some beers. Well, if we're looking at ELF-sized ABI changes, how about 3.0 be the release where we re-sync the syscall numbers on all the archs? ;) --==_Exmh_1306285994_4707P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFN3FeqcC3lWbTT17ARAv04AJkBCqmgJQk5Su57aDSar4uSGf4s4wCg4k/H +Qm5XV5rza4hbeoNy0XS7gk= =UhnL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1306285994_4707P-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Emil Langrock Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 11:12:24 +0200 Message-ID: <201105251112.27833.emil.langrock@gmx.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.22]:35510 "HELO mailout-de.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752481Ab1EYJMe (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 05:12:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Jan Engelhardt , Ted Ts'o Cc: eschvoca , Linus Torvalds , "H. Peter Anvin" , "jonsmirl@gmail.com" , Alan Cox , Jacek Luczak , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , linux-fsdevel On Tuesday 24 May 2011 23:05:30 Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Tuesday 2011-05-24 20:48, eschvoca wrote: > >On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever. > > > >Using the date also clearly communicates it is not about features. > > On the contrary: Whenever a 2.6.x release was set out the door, there > was at least one new feature in the cycle. Given the endless manpower > that seems to trail Linux, that seems unlikely to change in the near > term. > > On "It is not about features" - it is not /just/ about features - it > is also about fixes, which are equally important, and they also > warrant a version bump of some sort on their own. Pointing out the > obvious, the stable serieses. You are mixing up features based versioning and identifier for versions. Linux has no feature based concept for most parts of their version number (only the patch part clearly states: fixes, fixes, fixes). We only need something that is easily readable and maybe has no extreme weird meaning that leads to false conclusions. And yes, that is what eschvoca meant and not something like "linux is stagnating". > "Fleeing" to date-based version numbering seems like an excuse > for making way for releases without any change whatsoever. > (IOW, if there were features/fixes, a non-date based scheme of > incremental numbers could indicate them already.) Yes, that is usally the case... release the same source tarball again and again. I always had that feeling when looking at those wine, ubuntu, gentoo, ms, texlive, iasl, hugin, u-boot, ... developers. They are doing nothing the whole day and the marketing department does everything. > >Me, a nobody end user, would prefer a version number that corresponded > >to the date. Something like: > > > >%y.%m. > >%Y.%m. > > Except that LINUX_KERNEL_VERSION has only 8 bits for each, > so 2011 is out of range, which would need to kept in mind. > And a 2-digit spec.. nah that does not feel very 100-year > proof. (Just look at struct tm.tm_year for the mess 2-digits > made technically.) What is LINUX_KERNEL_VERSION? I only know LINUX_VERSION_CODE and KERNEL_VERSION And the calculation behind it is following: (((a) << 16) + ((b) << 8) + (c)) So for KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,40) we would get 0x20628 and for KERNEL_VERSION(2011,2,0) we would get 0x07DB0200. Of course our grandgrandgrand...grand children would die in agony in the year 65536. And maybe (probably the module version check guys will kill me) could use a compressed version of that without hurding the comparison function in out of kernel modules. KERNEL_VERSION_Y(a,b) would be defined as #define KERNEL_VERSION_Y(a,b) ({typeof (a) _a = a; \ typeof (b) _b = b; \ KERNEL_VERSION(_a >> 8, _a & 0xff, _b); }) This would bring us to the year 16777216 before everybody gets punched in his private parts by the versioning scheme. It is also possible to get more out of 32 bits when we can assume that Linus or his grandgrand...grand children will never do more than 128 releases a year. But yes, I aggree not to use 2 digit numbers for years.... unless we want to start the y2k+100 problem here. > >Then users would know the significance of the number and when a vendor > >says they support Linux 11.09 the user will immediately know if they > >are up to date. > > An added issue with that would be that numbers would not increase in > same-sized steps anymore and leave gaps. (There would probably be no > 11.06 between 11.05 aka 2.6.39 and 11.07-or-so aka 2.6.40) Ok, this is really a good example why we should not use the month for releases, but an ever increasing number until the first number is also increased which resets the second number to 0. Kind regards, Emil From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Kosina Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 14:52:05 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDC2236.6010608@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4DDC2236.6010608@mit.edu> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 24 May 2011, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > Also, when someone in my lab installs here> on a box that's running software I wrote that needs to support > modern high-speed peripherals, then I can say "What? You seriously > expect this stuff to work on Linux 2007? Let's install a slightly less > stable distro from at least 2010." This sounds a lot less nerdy than > "What? You seriously expect this stuff to work on Linux 2.6.27? Let's > install a slightly less stable distro that uses at least 2.6.36." I hate to jump into this excellent example of bike-shedding discussion, but anyway ... Your example doesn't really reflect reality. It's common for older enterprise distributions to gradually incorporate a lot of backported code (and most importantly new hardware support code/drivers) while not upgrading the kernel major version. So yes, you will in reality get 2.6.16 kernel (at least according to uname) with libata with newer service packs of SLES 10, for example (and you could find many of those across distributions). -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 17:12:47 +0300 Message-ID: <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from daytona.panasas.com ([67.152.220.89]:29810 "EHLO daytona.panasas.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756744Ab1EYOMl (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 10:12:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alexey Zaytsev , Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On 05/23/2011 11:52 PM, Alexey Zaytsev wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 00:33, Linus Torvalds > wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. >> >> But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a >> fairly nice round number. >> >> There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers >> based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to >> start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. >> >> But we'll see. > > Maybe, 2011.x, or 11.x, x increasing for every merge window started this year? > This would better reflect the steady nature of the releases, but would > certainly break a lot of scripts. ;) My $0.017 on this. Clearly current process is time based. People have said. * Keep Three digit numbers to retain script compatibility * Make it clear from the version when it was released. * Linus said 3 as for 3rd decade * Nice single increment number progression * Please make it look like a nice version number sys-admins will feel at home with So if you combine all the above: D. Y. N D - Is the decade since birth (1991 not 1990) Y - is the year in the decade so you have 3.1.x, 3.2.x, .. 3.10.x, 4.1.X and so on Nice incremental number. N - The Linus release of this Year. So this 3rd one goes up to 4 most probably. Linus always likes, and feels very poetic about the Christmas version release. He hates it when once it slipped into the next year. So now he gets to increment the second digit as a bonus. The 2nd digit gets to start on a *one*, never zero and goes up to *10*, to symbolize the 1991 birth. And we never have .zero quality, right? The first Digit gets incremented on decade from 1991 so on 2011 and not 2010 So here you have it, who said we need to compromise? Free life Boaz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin Nybo Andersen Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 17:03:10 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110525040627.753980f8.lisa@ltmnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Zimny Lech Cc: Lisa Milne , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 24 May 2011, Zimny Lech wrote: > Hi, > > 2011/5/24 Lisa Milne : >>> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >>> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >>> the fourth one. >> >> How about stardates? > > This is a wonderful idea! :) I'd rather go for a gardensheduler, which can tell me the optimal color for any given moment *and* do the paint job. If it eventually ends this discussion, it could be renamed "completely fair gardensheduler". > >> That'd make a release made now 64860.8 >> >> I really should sleep more... Or drink less coffee ... ;) -- Regards, Martin -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Luck Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 15:21:00 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Boaz Harrosh Cc: Alexey Zaytsev , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > So if you combine all the above: > > D. Y. N > D - Is the decade since birth (1991 not 1990) > Y - is the year in the decade so you have 3.1.x, 3.2.x, .. 3.10.x, 4.1.X = and so on > =A0 =A0Nice incremental number. > N - The Linus release of this Year. So this 3rd one goes up to 4 most pro= bably. > > Linus always likes, and feels very poetic about the Christmas version rel= ease. > He hates it when once it slipped into the next year. So now he gets to in= crement > the second digit as a bonus. > > The 2nd digit gets to start on a *one*, never zero and goes up to *10*, t= o symbolize > the 1991 birth. And we never have .zero quality, right? > > The first Digit gets incremented on decade from 1991 so on 2011 and not 2= 010 This is clearly the best suggestion so far - small numbers, somewhat date related (but without stuffing a "2011." on the front). No ".0" releases, ever. But best of all it defines now when we will switch to 4.x.y and 5.x.y so we don't have to keep having this discussion whenever someone thinks that the numbers are getting "too big" (well perhaps when we get to the tenth decade or so :-) So the only thing left to argue is whether the upcoming release should be numbered "3.1.1" as the first release in the first year of the 3rd decade ... or whether we should count 2.6.37 .. 2.6.39 as the first three releases this year and thus we ought to start with "3.1.4" (so we start with "pi"!). Linus: If you go with this, you should let Boaz set the new "NAME" as a prize for such an inspired solution. -Tony -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio?= Basto Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 17:13:57 +0100 Message-ID: <1306426437.6981.14.camel@segulix> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "jonsmirl@gmail.com" Cc: Alan Cox , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm , Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , Jan Engelhardt , Jacek Luczak , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 11:07 -0400, jonsmirl@gmail.com wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox > wrote: > > Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a > big > > version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all > in > > git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some > crawly > > horror back from the dead. >=20 > 2.8 could mark the beginning of the great cleanup > --- work out the details of what needs to be cleaned and set a goal > --- remove old buses/driver, switch to device tree, graphics, 32/64 > merges, etc > 3.0 would mark its completion=20 Here it go my opinion, Many people ask for beginning of 2.7 kernel series which will end on 2.8, by old numeration.=20 Kernel 2.8 will mainly a major clean up, of support of the very old hardware, like "math co-processor" at only exist in 386 and before Pentium. If some one want put Linux on this very old hardware should us= e kernel 2.2. However a new numeration of kernel is independent of this, and I agree with new numeration of kernel on drop a number.=20 Last but not least, I would like to see marked a hiper stable kernel , which will be used by Debian guys. Debian guys tend to stop in a kernel which is not the best one, so let we choose for them what is the stable of stables . =20 Best regards,=20 --=20 S=C3=A9rgio M. B. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel= " in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 19:38:12 +0300 Message-ID: <4DDE81F4.8060800@panasas.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from daytona.panasas.com ([67.152.220.89]:27899 "EHLO daytona.panasas.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751748Ab1EZQiK (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2011 12:38:10 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Tony Luck Cc: Alexey Zaytsev , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On 05/26/2011 01:21 AM, Tony Luck wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >> So if you combine all the above: >> >> D. Y. N >> D - Is the decade since birth (1991 not 1990) >> Y - is the year in the decade so you have 3.1.x, 3.2.x, .. 3.10.x, 4.1.X and so on >> Nice incremental number. >> N - The Linus release of this Year. So this 3rd one goes up to 4 most probably. >> >> Linus always likes, and feels very poetic about the Christmas version release. >> He hates it when once it slipped into the next year. So now he gets to increment >> the second digit as a bonus. >> >> The 2nd digit gets to start on a *one*, never zero and goes up to *10*, to symbolize >> the 1991 birth. And we never have .zero quality, right? >> >> The first Digit gets incremented on decade from 1991 so on 2011 and not 2010 > > This is clearly the best suggestion so far - small numbers, somewhat > date related (but without stuffing a "2011." on the front). No ".0" > releases, ever. > > But best of all it defines now when we will switch to 4.x.y and 5.x.y > so we don't have to keep having this discussion whenever someone thinks > that the numbers are getting "too big" (well perhaps when we get to the > tenth decade or so :-) > > So the only thing left to argue is whether the upcoming release should > be numbered "3.1.1" as the first release in the first year of the 3rd > decade ... or whether we should count 2.6.37 .. 2.6.39 as the first > three releases this year and thus we ought to start with "3.1.4" (so we > start with "pi"!). > Yes, Yes I like this a lot. I love pi, thanks. Boaz > Linus: If you go with this, you should let Boaz set the new "NAME" > as a prize for such an inspired solution. > > -Tony From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:44212 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756560Ab1EWTNy (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 15:13:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 12:13:29 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: (Short?) merge window reminder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm Cc: Greg KH , Andrew Morton Message-ID: <20110523191329.G5tRbgLOO8fbleysP-9jFP8YlMl2CYWista-7HYkYY8@z> So I've been busily merging stuff, and just wanted to send out a quick reminder that I warned people in the 39 announcement that this might be a slightly shorter merge window than usual, so that I can avoid having to make the -rc1 release from Japan using my slow laptop (doing "allyesconfig" builds on that thing really isn't in the cards, and I like to do those to verify things - even if we've already had a few cases where arch include differences made it less than effective in finding problems). And judging by the merge window so far, that early close (probably Sunday - I'll be on airplanes next Monday) looks rather likely. I already seem to have a fairly sizable portion of linux-next in my tree, and there haven't been any huge upsets. So anybody who was planning a last-minute "please pull" - this is a heads-up. Don't do it, you might miss the window entirely. Did I miss any major development mailing lists with stuff pending? Linus PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to do things, I listen. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:44061 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933126Ab1EWTVI (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 15:21:08 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 21:20:56 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110523192056.AZZqiuaGQFUJpCcOZbZcJSNJM9E4AaXB23POkTQIfrI@z> * Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. > I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going > to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to do > things, I listen. I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) Ingo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:42772 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932425Ab1EWTVy (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 15:21:54 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 12:22:56 -0700 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110523192256.GA18935@suse.de> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton Message-ID: <20110523192256.AFkmGyvNrVgNSg4DeMex68Y-QZZ1BRNlrF34VmkMBfQ@z> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:13:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. If you do this, I will buy you a bottle of whatever whiskey you want that I can get my hands on in Tokyo next week. {crosses fingers} greg k-h From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:56134 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933472Ab1EWUEP (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 16:04:15 -0400 Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder From: James Bottomley In-Reply-To: <20110523192256.GA18935@suse.de> References: <20110523192256.GA18935@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 00:04:08 +0400 Message-ID: <1306181049.2442.1.camel@mulgrave.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Greg KH Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton Message-ID: <20110523200408.tXWgO-Idygd3Eh-t6Uz-1CEno3cd4khll1SJe8BpdW8@z> On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 12:22 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:13:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. > > If you do this, I will buy you a bottle of whatever whiskey you want > that I can get my hands on in Tokyo next week. I can recommend Hanyu Ace of Spades ... I can even arrange to be on hand just to make sure it's as good as it should be ... James From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com ([69.89.21.11]:41195 "HELO oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S934085Ab1EWUV3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 16:21:29 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 13:21:26 -0700 From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110523132126.3f6ead5f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Greg KH , Andrew Morton Message-ID: <20110523202126.ixVchjUv2G52EKjw8dzj9pI4eq_3LknSqabGeOcIqis@z> On Mon, 23 May 2011 21:25:25 +0200 (CEST) Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. > > So the voices tell you to avoid .42 ? They tell him to avoid the question to which 42 is the answer. --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:42447 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753052Ab1EWUep (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 16:34:45 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 13:33:48 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110523203348.9oYnXsF9eWTuRtYANR2lqC5uoYRJoD9XhP27l8Sym54@z> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than the fourth one. But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a fairly nice round number. There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. But we'll see. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:60455 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755773Ab1EWXYG (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 19:24:06 -0400 Message-ID: <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:23:20 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ted Ts'o , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On 05/23/2011 04:17 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. > That sounds like a good thing. -hpa From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:48283 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030316Ab1EWVCm (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 17:02:42 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 17:02:38 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110523210238.GB10792@home.goodmis.org> References: <20110523132126.3f6ead5f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523132126.3f6ead5f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Greg KH , Andrew Morton Message-ID: <20110523210238.WHwKcfPVn5_xbcjDI_iCRM4KZLi8fLTv8USkQhUGQ3c@z> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:21:26PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > They tell him to avoid the question to which 42 is the answer. What 2.6 Linux kernel version was the last before 3.0? -- Steve From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:46390 "EHLO test.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755728Ab1EWXRd (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 19:17:33 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 19:17:21 -0400 From: Ted Ts'o Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110523231721.a4hxgXzOYN9FHNLj4OZTFgRL01nu9W-TPnNihU1lU9o@z> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different from what we have now. - Ted From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:58461 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755782Ab1EWXeF (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 19:34:05 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:33:12 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Ted Ts'o , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110523233312.DnnGQ8rqpP-fD2Hd4JU6WfwzOMgBR-MQlQCZKJqMaHg@z> Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also numbers" transition much more natural. Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development trees. But if I do 3.0, then I'd be chucking that whole thing out the window, and the next release would be 3.1, 3.2, etc.. And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just do 4.0 etc. Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from atl.turmel.org ([74.117.157.138]:37213 "EHLO atl.turmel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757695Ab1EXAMz (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 20:12:55 -0400 Message-ID: <4DDAF394.7050405@turmel.org> Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 19:53:56 -0400 From: Phil Turmel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110523235356.68UHRCsGQ98zoWeGaX6C9ViLhLOmW3OKyqLpJtXX_lY@z> Hi Linus, On 05/23/2011 04:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. A few months ago, I briefly considered suggesting that the demise of the BKL would be a suitable milestone for the numbering shakeup. But I am a mere mortal lurker, and I remember past flame-fests this topic spawned. So I chickened out. As a small-scale linux evangelist, I would sure like to skip the explanation of the version numbers. Phil From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:45407 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751188Ab1EXCBs (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 22:01:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 04:01:35 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110524020135.GA19249@elte.hu> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110524020135.5PbLmfK_eoX6VghAW2TifRh2-jsjZq9ZGZMrlxgLoak@z> * Linus Torvalds wrote: > Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of > 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also > numbers" transition much more natural. Yeah, it sounds really good to get rid of the (meanwhile) meaningless "2.6." prefix from our version code and iterate it in a more meaningful way. I suspect the stable team and distros will enjoy the more meaningful third digit as well: it will raise the perceived importance of stabilization and packaging work. Btw., we should probably remove the fourth (patch) level, otherwise distros might feel tempted to fill it in with their own patch-stack version number, which would result in confusing "3.3.1.5" meaning different things on different distros - while 3.3.1-5.rpm style of distro kernel package naming denotes the distro patch level more clearly. I don't think the odd/even history will linger too long: in practice we'll iterate through 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 rather quickly, in the first year, so any residual notion of stable/unstable will be gone within a few iterations. > Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - > there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development > trees. But if I do 3.0, then I'd be chucking that whole thing out the > window, and the next release would be 3.1, 3.2, etc.. > > And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, > so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just > do 4.0 etc. Perhaps we could do 4.0 once the last bit of -rt hits upstream? /me ducks > Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these > days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly > fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. They are very stable releases as far as i'm concerned - i can pretty confidently run and use -rc2 and better kernels on my boxes these days and could do so for the past few years. Thanks, Ingo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:55783 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755737Ab1EXCLt (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 22:11:49 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 04:11:39 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110524021139.GB19249@elte.hu> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110524021139.AdQIuD0pw9dbHJGVnJc8IlcR3rbUkfWtqeFNfCNOnio@z> * Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. Also, in all fairness, we should probably display a certain amount of humility: while Linux has certainly reached milestones such as world domination (as far as large and small computers are concerned), so calling it 3.0 is a fair deal, we probably have to wait for version 42.0 before we can consider the Linux kernel to be the ultimate answer to life, universe and everything. Thanks, Ingo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:50177 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753632Ab1EXHzz (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 03:55:55 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 09:55:42 +0200 References: <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <201105240955.43229.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Ted Ts'o , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110524075542.k3vz_5ACbdFQmpTDsZI6R4mAvvrPtspK41t3yQoE02o@z> On Tuesday 24 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of > 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also > numbers" transition much more natural. > > Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - > there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development > trees. But if I do 3.0, then I'd be chucking that whole thing out the > window, and the next release would be 3.1, 3.2, etc.. I like that. While I don't really care if you call it 2.7, 2.8 or 3.0 (or 4.0 even, if you want to keep continuity following .38 and .39), the current 2.5/2.6 numbering cycle is almost 10 years old and has obviously lost all significance. The only reason I can see that would make it worthwhile waiting for is if the enterprise and embedded people were to decide on a common longterm kernel and call that e.g. 2.7.x or 2.8.x while you continue with 2.9.x or 3.0.x or 3.x. My impression is however that the next longterm release is still one or two years away, so probably not worth waiting for and hard to estimate in advance. > Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these > days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly > fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. We still have stable and unstable releases, except that you call the unstable ones -rcX and they are all nice and short, unlike the infamous 2.1.xxx series ;-) IMHO simply changing the names from 2.6.40-rcX to 2.7.X and from 2.6.40.X to 2.6.8.X etc would be the most straightforward change if you want to save the 3.0 release for a special moment. Enough bike shedding from my side, please just make a decision. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from h5.dl5rb.org.uk ([81.2.74.5]:50471 "EHLO duck.linux-mips.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752662Ab1EXOtX (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 10:49:23 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:48:39 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110524144839.GC30117@linux-mips.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ted Ts'o , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 07:17:21PM -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. It will require another bunch of changes to scripts that try to make sense out of kernel Linux version numbers. It's a minor issue and we might be better off doing something else than version number magic. Not last a new major version number raises expectations - whatever those might be. Ralf From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:60428 "EHLO www.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932282Ab1EXOk1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 10:40:27 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:41:37 +0100 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110524154137.5ab5e110@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ted Ts'o Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , linux-mm , linux-fsdevel , Andrew Morton Message-ID: <20110524144137.4TaPPoMiIxHcQ8_sjNr7asEH7vYzSQcd60v34L1WSOI@z> > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. I think I prefer 3 digits. Otherwise we will have to pass 3.0, 3.1 and 3.11 all of which numbers still give older sysadmins flashbacks and will have them waking screaming in the middle of the night. Also saves breaking all the tools and assumptions people have been used to for some many years Alan From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:54712 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932326Ab1EXRgs (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 13:36:48 -0400 Message-ID: <4DDBEC91.8020004@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 10:36:17 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "jonsmirl@gmail.com" Cc: Alan Cox , Jacek Luczak , Jan Engelhardt , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm , Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds Message-ID: <20110524173617.Pqj5QFpVRt5s89wCra9c4IfHdTR1xFkiXw8cGb3_nTw@z> On 05/24/2011 08:07 AM, jonsmirl@gmail.com wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox wrote: >> Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big >> version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in >> git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly >> horror back from the dead. > > 2.8 could mark the beginning of the great cleanup > --- work out the details of what needs to be cleaned and set a goal > --- remove old buses/driver, switch to device tree, graphics, 32/64 > merges, etc > 3.0 would mark its completion > I think this whole discussion misses the essence of the new development model, which is that we no longer do these kinds of feature-based major milestones. If we want to to deprecate lots of drivers (which I personally would advocate against -- I have built systems specifically to run a real floppy drive since the Linux floppy driver is amazingly flexible and can read/write a lot of formats that nothing else can, including USB floppies) then we should do that in the normal course of action, incrementally, and listed in feature-removal-schedule.txt, not all at once due to some arbitrary milestone. We have found it works better this way. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from b2F7C.static.pacific.net.au ([203.143.236.124]:46293 "EHLO mail.ltmnet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753084Ab1EXSPZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 14:15:25 -0400 Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 04:06:27 +1000 From: Lisa Milne Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110525040627.753980f8.lisa@ltmnet.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110524180627._dFDvc2PLE1jyswn3fVr5fOrGUCqsfDJZrjx9b75hsA@z> > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. How about stardates? That'd make a release made now 64860.8 I really should sleep more... -- Lisa Milne From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from enyo.dsw2k3.info ([195.71.86.239]:38221 "EHLO enyo.dsw2k3.info" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756569Ab1EXSow (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 14:44:52 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 20:34:05 +0200 From: Matthias Schniedermeyer Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110524183405.GA14493@citd.de> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110524183405.jIZbwf3q9urWYBuUSCU6iedYPnL00HlaA694n9yX4Oo@z> On 23.05.2011 13:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. What about strictly 3 part versions? Just add a .0. 3.0.0 - Release Kernel 3.0 3.0.1 - Stable 1 3.0.2 - Stable 2 3.1.0 - Release Kernel 3.1 3.1.1 - Stable 1 ... Biggest problem is likely version phobics that get pimples when they see trailing zeros. ;-) Bis denn -- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm ([64.81.33.126]:58155 "EHLO bifrost.lang.hm" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932722Ab1EXSzu (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 14:55:50 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 11:55:27 -0700 (PDT) From: david@lang.hm Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder In-Reply-To: <20110524183405.GA14493@citd.de> Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110524183405.GA14493@citd.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Matthias Schniedermeyer Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110524185527.KG1Afa1zfwOpxbiuzD_KRFyeLXt6VExmKlHHepfSsZk@z> On Tue, 24 May 2011, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: > On 23.05.2011 13:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > What about strictly 3 part versions? Just add a .0. > > 3.0.0 - Release Kernel 3.0 > 3.0.1 - Stable 1 > 3.0.2 - Stable 2 > 3.1.0 - Release Kernel 3.1 > 3.1.1 - Stable 1 > ... > > Biggest problem is likely version phobics that get pimples when they see > trailing zeros. ;-) since there are always issues discovered with a new kernel is released (which is why the -stable kernels exist), being wary of .0 kernels is not neccessarily a bad thing. I still think a date based approach would be the best. since people are worried about not knowing when a final release will happen, base the date on when the merge window opened or closed (always known at the time of the first -rc kernel) in the thread on lwn, people pointed out that the latest 2.6.32 kernel would still be a 2009.12.X which doesn't reflect the fact that it was released this month. My suggestion for that is to make the X be the number of months (or years.months if you don't like large month values) between the merge window and the release of the -stable release. This would lead to a small problem when there are multiple -stable releases in a month, but since that doesn't last very long I don't see a real problem with just incramenting the month into the future in those cases. David Lang From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.216.46]:44809 "EHLO mail-qw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752938Ab1EXU7N convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 16:59:13 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110525040627.753980f8.lisa@ltmnet.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110525040627.753980f8.lisa@ltmnet.com> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 22:59:12 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder From: Zimny Lech Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Lisa Milne Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110524205912.RlY7teWrmn-e-habWXRbs8mWHpqq26NevmKQL67efPE@z> Hi, 2011/5/24 Lisa Milne : >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > How about stardates? This is a wonderful idea! :) > That'd make a release made now 64860.8 > > I really should sleep more... > > -- > Lisa Milne > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > -- Slawa! Zimny Lech z Wawelu From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from DMZ-MAILSEC-SCANNER-3.MIT.EDU ([18.9.25.14]:53305 "EHLO dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757385Ab1EXVaV (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 17:30:21 -0400 Message-ID: <4DDC2236.6010608@mit.edu> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 17:25:10 -0400 From: Andy Lutomirski MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110524212510.HlNWZXqX27_lh0qjyYKywb7D8lRlWKoAI2EohrHefnw@z> On 05/23/2011 04:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. > I don't think year-based versions (like 2011.0 for the first 2011 release, or maybe 2011.5 for May 2011) are pretty, but I'll make an argument for them anyway: it makes it easier to figure out when hardware ought to be supported. So if I buy a 2014-model laptop and the coffee-making button doesn't work, and my favorite distro is running the 2013 kernel, then I know I shouldn't expect to it to work. (Graphics drivers are probably a more realistic example.) Also, when someone in my lab installs on a box that's running software I wrote that needs to support modern high-speed peripherals, then I can say "What? You seriously expect this stuff to work on Linux 2007? Let's install a slightly less stable distro from at least 2010." This sounds a lot less nerdy than "What? You seriously expect this stuff to work on Linux 2.6.27? Let's install a slightly less stable distro that uses at least 2.6.36." --Andy From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.9]:63466 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754053Ab1EXW6h (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 18:58:37 -0400 From: "Hans-Peter Jansen" Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 01:00:07 +0200 References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-ID: <201105250100.08708.hpj@urpla.net> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH , aufs-users@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <20110524230007.Y_Cnbv0RBtbyt0NUNiSmQBRDlO_ADL51Bckn2_kPXI4@z> On Monday 23 May 2011, 22:33:48 Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 > > before cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. But hey, do you really want to release a Linux 3.0 kernel without serious layered filesystem functionality? Shame on you, Pete PS.: Sorry for being such a pest in this regard, but filesystem layering is one of the most important missing bits to excel out of the box in * live distros * diskless computing * flash based systems Even the linux based commercial PBX solution (mobydick), I bought, ships with it. PPS.: Bad timing, I know, but I'm glad, that Al is back to life again.. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57530 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932207Ab1EYMww (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 08:52:52 -0400 Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 14:52:05 +0200 (CEST) From: Jiri Kosina Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder In-Reply-To: <4DDC2236.6010608@mit.edu> Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDC2236.6010608@mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110525125205.vHjbQ4bKd1x6W5s8DLMoKxX0F8tBAs9HN-rm7lUiFpI@z> On Tue, 24 May 2011, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > Also, when someone in my lab installs here> on a box that's running software I wrote that needs to support > modern high-speed peripherals, then I can say "What? You seriously > expect this stuff to work on Linux 2007? Let's install a slightly less > stable distro from at least 2010." This sounds a lot less nerdy than > "What? You seriously expect this stuff to work on Linux 2.6.27? Let's > install a slightly less stable distro that uses at least 2.6.36." I hate to jump into this excellent example of bike-shedding discussion, but anyway ... Your example doesn't really reflect reality. It's common for older enterprise distributions to gradually incorporate a lot of backported code (and most importantly new hardware support code/drivers) while not upgrading the kernel major version. So yes, you will in reality get 2.6.16 kernel (at least according to uname) with libata with newer service packs of SLES 10, for example (and you could find many of those across distributions). -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.fullrate.dk ([90.185.1.42]:64569 "EHLO smtp.fullrate.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753432Ab1EYPOI (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 11:14:08 -0400 Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 17:03:10 +0200 (CEST) From: Martin Nybo Andersen Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110525040627.753980f8.lisa@ltmnet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Zimny Lech Cc: Lisa Milne , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110525150310.-XPBiUE-dxU2UFllByZj4L6vlxK9WzyWmhSHcWCloXc@z> On Tue, 24 May 2011, Zimny Lech wrote: > Hi, > > 2011/5/24 Lisa Milne : >>> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >>> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >>> the fourth one. >> >> How about stardates? > > This is a wonderful idea! :) I'd rather go for a gardensheduler, which can tell me the optimal color for any given moment *and* do the paint job. If it eventually ends this discussion, it could be renamed "completely fair gardensheduler". > >> That'd make a release made now 64860.8 >> >> I really should sleep more... Or drink less coffee ... ;) -- Regards, Martin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-iw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:38581 "EHLO mail-iw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751900Ab1EYWVA convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 18:21:00 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 15:21:00 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder From: Tony Luck Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Boaz Harrosh Cc: Alexey Zaytsev , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Message-ID: <20110525222100.-EqjuuyDRSS4Nby7VrSratgovR7w2d9bIhHhl4khZkE@z> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > So if you combine all the above: > > D. Y. N > D - Is the decade since birth (1991 not 1990) > Y - is the year in the decade so you have 3.1.x, 3.2.x, .. 3.10.x, 4.1.X and so on >    Nice incremental number. > N - The Linus release of this Year. So this 3rd one goes up to 4 most probably. > > Linus always likes, and feels very poetic about the Christmas version release. > He hates it when once it slipped into the next year. So now he gets to increment > the second digit as a bonus. > > The 2nd digit gets to start on a *one*, never zero and goes up to *10*, to symbolize > the 1991 birth. And we never have .zero quality, right? > > The first Digit gets incremented on decade from 1991 so on 2011 and not 2010 This is clearly the best suggestion so far - small numbers, somewhat date related (but without stuffing a "2011." on the front). No ".0" releases, ever. But best of all it defines now when we will switch to 4.x.y and 5.x.y so we don't have to keep having this discussion whenever someone thinks that the numbers are getting "too big" (well perhaps when we get to the tenth decade or so :-) So the only thing left to argue is whether the upcoming release should be numbered "3.1.1" as the first release in the first year of the 3rd decade ... or whether we should count 2.6.37 .. 2.6.39 as the first three releases this year and thus we ought to start with "3.1.4" (so we start with "pi"!). Linus: If you go with this, you should let Boaz set the new "NAME" as a prize for such an inspired solution. -Tony From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay1.ptmail.sapo.pt ([212.55.154.21]:38110 "HELO sapo.pt" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932523Ab1EZQUn (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2011 12:20:43 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO sergiomb.no-ip.org) (sergiomb@sapo.pt@[188.83.245.204]) (envelope-sender ) by mta14 (qmail-ptmail-1.0.0) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 26 May 2011 16:13:59 -0000 Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio?= Basto Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 17:13:57 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <1306426437.6981.14.camel@segulix> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "jonsmirl@gmail.com" Cc: Alan Cox , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm , Ted Ts'o , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , Jan Engelhardt , Jacek Luczak , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds Message-ID: <20110526161357.8Zek_7rsfPm81Zs6BWovKlLumj_VBJnUswMxjuj-P44@z> On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 11:07 -0400, jonsmirl@gmail.com wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox > wrote: > > Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a > big > > version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all > in > > git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some > crawly > > horror back from the dead. > > 2.8 could mark the beginning of the great cleanup > --- work out the details of what needs to be cleaned and set a goal > --- remove old buses/driver, switch to device tree, graphics, 32/64 > merges, etc > 3.0 would mark its completion Here it go my opinion, Many people ask for beginning of 2.7 kernel series which will end on 2.8, by old numeration. Kernel 2.8 will mainly a major clean up, of support of the very old hardware, like "math co-processor" at only exist in 386 and before Pentium. If some one want put Linux on this very old hardware should use kernel 2.2. However a new numeration of kernel is independent of this, and I agree with new numeration of kernel on drop a number. Last but not least, I would like to see marked a hiper stable kernel , which will be used by Debian guys. Debian guys tend to stop in a kernel which is not the best one, so let we choose for them what is the stable of stables . Best regards, -- Sérgio M. B. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756591Ab1EXNkM (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 09:40:12 -0400 Received: from zfrontend2.aha.ru ([195.2.83.148]:41819 "EHLO aha.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756372Ab1EXNkK (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 09:40:10 -0400 From: "werner" Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser Interface v.4.3.12 Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 09:40:06 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Version numbers should not be only numerology, but connected to quality or progress. Comparing the situation of the 1, 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, 2.6 versions, since starting 2.6 , the progress of the kernel, and also the situation of Linux as a whole and of its use changed very. Exactly in the last subversions with many new hardware modules/drivers the quality improved very. At the same time, the subversions becomes too much since the last new version. Thus, it's time for 2.8 or even 3.0 in order to mark this very improved quality and use of Linux since the start of the 2 and 2.6 versions. wl --- Professional hosting for everyone - http://www.host.ru From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932391Ab1EXOJs (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 10:09:48 -0400 Received: from mail-gw0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:45440 "EHLO mail-gw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752653Ab1EXOJr convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 10:09:47 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Vcnu2NXSsbfD5bLO/tlSFAiKvfEMhKQ6Z/2ZFNXxh4vmGO4+gUdwkgfa15io5uG8US awJPx7GltdEbc3I88xFC/M3FWhFw20H7yTlz63hr6NCcigFdAUBcFFFOuGzN/ly5gS0Z cUoMwMg2qpfFWR5vHfid/S0xVNKhA3FsqPH6M= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 10:09:46 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder From: Jerome Glisse To: werner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:40 AM, werner wrote: > Version numbers should not be only numerology, but connected to quality or > progress.  Comparing the situation of the 1, 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, 2.6 versions, > since starting 2.6 , the progress of the kernel, and also the situation of > Linux as a whole and of its use changed very.  Exactly in the last > subversions with many new hardware modules/drivers the quality improved > very.  At the same time, the subversions becomes too much since the last new > version.  Thus, it's time for 2.8 or even 3.0 in order to mark this very > improved quality and use of Linux since the start of the 2 and 2.6 versions. >    wl > --- If i were to give my feeling, and i am doing it right now, i wish that such version change to be backed with things like removal of dead code for instance in the GPU side we would like at one point to drop non KMS path and delete a whole bunch of files and dead API in the process (at least that's on my bad santa list). Non KMS is in survival mode, at this point we try to not break it but we don't give shit about it. Bug against it are redirected to the closest black hole. Cheers, Jerome From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932605Ab1EXPz5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 11:55:57 -0400 Received: from mailrelay04.solcon.nl ([212.45.32.115]:33952 "EHLO mailrelay04.solcon.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932453Ab1EXPz4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 11:55:56 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 1201 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 24 May 2011 11:55:55 EDT Message-ID: <4DDBD058.3080801@solcon.nl> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 17:35:52 +0200 From: Albert Pool Reply-To: albertpool@solcon.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org A new major version number will reach high expectations. I think it's better to wait till the power issues of 2.6.38/39 are fixed and proved to be absent, before naming it Linux 3.0. Anyway, wouldn't it be a great date to release Linux 3 on August 21, 2011? I know it's hard to achieve this exact date with a stable 3.0. If you don't think a fixed date for a stable version is a good idea, you could release the first RC of 3.0 on that date. About the scripts: if they don't like the version number to be 1 digit shorter, why not append an extra .0 to uname? This digit can be used for bugfix releases, like 2.6.38.7. In the current system, an extra digit is added for those releases. But if that extra digit will always be there, and is 0 by default, scripts won't care about the lack of a 3rd digit. Then, the 3.0 will be 3.0.0, with new releases (current 3rd digit) being 3.1.0, 3.2.0, ..., and bugfix releases (current 4th digit) being 3.0.1, 3.0.2, .... It might be a bit confusing after the switch, but if we change to a 2-digit number, it's confusing too. Scripts recognizing bugfixes as new releases is a smaller disaster than scripts crashing or returning errors due to the lack of a 3rd digit. I agree with Jon Smirl that it could be probably better to release 2.8 first, but there's also a good side on switching to 3.0. We are skipping 2.7, that means our version numbering system already changes a bit. Why not change it completely then? Sorry if I've missed out some discussion about this, I am not subscribed. I have only read some messages in the LKML archive. Albert Pool On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 15:48:39 +0100, Ralf Baechle wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 07:17:21PM -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. It will require another bunch of changes to scripts that try to make sense out of kernel Linux version numbers. It's a minor issue and we might be better off doing something else than version number magic. Not last a new major version number raises expectations - whatever those might be. Ralf From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751613Ab1EYEtT (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 00:49:19 -0400 Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:36634 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750816Ab1EYEtS (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 00:49:18 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=T9HKUNkDSpJs+xqrCNOgrgXRzSULgXDBLtLe3sn/mdmJtRUEOBXMyI4IqYspwXcc3y qlvax0lD0t/+OnnC4u/GLAdI1QJhanlEzU9Nmkl0eJy6FslktA10wFpKWkJtgedj7NDC tQqX4VLUqptGzEivm0TuVsByTuOa7EZ21zsts= Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 00:47:18 -0400 From: porpen To: Linus Torvalds Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110525044718.GA4647@bench> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:13:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. With all the discussion about matching the year, keeping the numbers smallish and breaking build/test scripts... Why not match the year this way: v2.11 = 2011 So, to get there, how about: v2.6.39 current v2.6.40 v2.7.? (see below) v2.11.0 sometime this year maybe or skipped. v2.12.? early 2012. v2.13.? early 2013. and so on... To hell with making the months match up to anything. IMHO, that's micromanaging BS that will cause recurring troubles forever. Advantages: -Build & test scripts won't break for a while. (see note about this below) -Major and Minor numbers together approximately match the year of release. -Subreleases don't get too big. e.g. with 2 week releases, v2.12.x might reach .26 or .27 and resets with v2.13.0 Disadvantages: -in the year 2100 the version will have to leap to v21.0 and that numbering will last until v29.99 or so. -most of us won't live long enough to see v31.14 or v42.0 The build scripts would finally break in the year 25500 with the step after kernel v254.99.?. I suspect one of our decendants in the next 23.5 thousand years can figure out how to fix that. IMHO, this may be a least effort compromise between the keep-numbers-small camp, the match-the-year camp and the don't-break-scripts camp. Of course, math junkies like me would love to see v2.7.18.28 at some point in the process. Could we jump straight to that just before we leap to v2.11.0 or whatever numbering is chosen please? -phil From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757575Ab1EYMeA (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 08:34:00 -0400 Received: from nfitmail.nfit.au.dk ([130.225.31.129]:36493 "EHLO smtp.nfit.au.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757186Ab1EYMd7 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 08:33:59 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 451 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 25 May 2011 08:33:58 EDT Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 14:26:18 +0200 From: Kasper Dupont To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110525122618.GA14303@colin.search.kasperd.net> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <6043.1306285994@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT In-Reply-To: <6043.1306285994@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-NFIT-ADSL: 2 X-NFIT-RelayAddr: 130.225.16.160 X-NFIT-MX: True X-Sim: 5b170ca98771493eef230891d2a96533cd035a237320acf425082ff4ee90feef 1158 X-NFIT-Solido-Score: 3. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 24/05/11 21.13, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > Well, if we're looking at ELF-sized ABI changes, how about 3.0 be the > release where we re-sync the syscall numbers on all the archs? ;) If you want to do that I think the best way to do it is to have both the old and the new numbers co-exist through the 3.x series and the old ones go away in 4.0. You'd first have to find the highest number currently assigned and then add a bit of safety margin to decide on a starting point for the new numbers. Should architecture dependent system calls be assigned from a separate interval where they could overlap between architectures? Or should they be assigned from the same sequence as other calls and return -ENOSYS on other architectures than the one they were targeted for? Or was it all a joke, and you don't actually want that cleanup to happen because of too much breakage? -- Kasper Dupont -- Rigtige mænd skriver deres egne backupprogrammer #define _(_)"d.%.4s%."_"2s" /* This is my email address */ char*_="@2kaspner"_()"%03"_("4s%.")"t\n";printf(_+11,_+6,_,11,_+2,_+7,_+6); From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932753Ab1EYUsh (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 16:48:37 -0400 Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]:48384 "EHLO lennier.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932580Ab1EYUsf (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2011 16:48:35 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3-dev To: Kasper Dupont Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 25 May 2011 14:26:18 +0200." <20110525122618.GA14303@colin.search.kasperd.net> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <6043.1306285994@localhost> <20110525122618.GA14303@colin.search.kasperd.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1306356508_2932P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 16:48:29 -0400 Message-ID: <24360.1306356509@localhost> X-Mirapoint-Received-SPF: 198.82.161.152 auth3.smtp.vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu 2 pass X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=neutral-1, source=Fixed, refid=n/a, actions=MAILHURDLE SPF TAG X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=dagger.cc.vt.edu X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A020202.4DDD6B1E.008C,ss=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2010-07-22 22:03:31, dmn=2009-09-10 00:05:08, mode=single engine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_1306356508_2932P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Wed, 25 May 2011 14:26:18 +0200, Kasper Dupont said: > On 24/05/11 21.13, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > > Well, if we're looking at ELF-sized ABI changes, how about 3.0 be the > > release where we re-sync the syscall numbers on all the archs? ;) > > If you want to do that I think the best way to do it is to > have both the old and the new numbers co-exist through the > 3.x series and the old ones go away in 4.0. > > You'd first have to find the highest number currently > assigned and then add a bit of safety margin to decide on > a starting point for the new numbers. Most archs are sitting around 300-340. Alpha is the apparent winner with 501. So start at 512 which is a nice round number. > Or was it all a joke, and you don't actually want that > cleanup to happen because of too much breakage? Well, with 2.0, we had some ABI cratering due to ELF. I figured *if* we're willing to do ABI cratering for a 3.0, cleaning up the syscalls would be a nice drastic way to start. ;) (Though to be honest, I think moving the a copy syscalls into one consistent table starting at 512 or so for 3.0, and then nuking the low numbers for 4.0 would be better. We would however have to take into account architectures that have limited number of syscalls available - any archs unable to handle syscall numbers up to 1024?) --==_Exmh_1306356508_2932P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFN3WsccC3lWbTT17ARAlEjAJwNRKL5BmEUcn9khC7iputwhtsg9QCgm3/T 3ObSPOm3Njl8V4PZ80r7eg4= =QvZs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1306356508_2932P-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754192Ab1E0Fo1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2011 01:44:27 -0400 Received: from mail-gw0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:49902 "EHLO mail-gw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751954Ab1E0Fo0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2011 01:44:26 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=OTaeYNyl0hI0ZQMIykBoe7lv4Wq8BLp0hPW6nrB+nQyUjCJjDGSeAff0mPVVZ5Wa/F 1243f0Cs42tqpQ3fuBN3S7Y55q9Rokw53WrBc6NEEXQzRQEaFvO7YYPRscqL6QBiBRr4 oOzxMgR/JN1UH7hL7DxtfgXaMa9GGfrokIzeE= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4DDE81F4.8060800@panasas.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> <4DDE81F4.8060800@panasas.com> Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 22:44:24 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder From: Keith Curtis To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Many interesting ideas on version numbering schemes. I like 2.11.X because it maps to years easily in people's mind, but I look forward to seeing what is chosen. You guys break many of the rules for software development, so why not going backwards in version numbers ;-) While you are talking about arbitrary numbers and new goals, I want to offer that you could consider a push towards zero bugs. In general, as long as your reliability monotonically increases (no regressions) that is an acceptable minimum approach because it means that you will never have a customer go from being happy to unhappy. However, it is common in companies to make an effort to get towards zero bugs. Zero bugs is impossible, and that is a philosophical discussion. If you look through your current list of bugs, nearly every one looks scary to me and important to someone. You currently have 2,800 active bugs (http://bit.ly/LinuxBugs) The last time I looked, I found the median age was 10 months. In general, bugs should be fixed in the next release and so therefore 3 months. Zero bug bounces is hard for the others because they don't have sufficient resources. However, I believe you easily do. I can't say that anything magical technically will happen if you work on your bugs faster, but I can say that people I respect as much as you taught me this. My salary was based on my ability to promptly respond to my bugs, and zero was everyone's goal. Hitting zero, even for a minute, could be a newsworthy event, as another way Linux is better than the others. It also shows leadership to user mode. I sometimes get the feeling that many in the FOSS community look at bugs as something they could work on when they get bored of adding new features, instead of: "Holy poop, there is someone unhappy out there." Warm regards, -Keith http://keithcu.com/ From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752332Ab1E0O3f (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2011 10:29:35 -0400 Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]:36819 "EHLO lennier.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751044Ab1E0O3e (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2011 10:29:34 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3-dev To: Keith Curtis Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Zero bugs (was Re: (Short?) merge window reminder) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 26 May 2011 22:44:24 PDT." From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> <4DDE81F4.8060800@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1306506572_2736P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 10:29:32 -0400 Message-ID: <4265.1306506572@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mirapoint-Received-SPF: 198.82.161.152 auth3.smtp.vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu 2 pass X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=neutral-1, source=Fixed, refid=n/a, actions=MAILHURDLE SPF TAG X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=vivi.cc.vt.edu X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A020203.4DDFB54D.0181,ss=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2010-07-22 22:03:31, dmn=2009-09-10 00:05:08, mode=single engine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_1306506572_2736P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Thu, 26 May 2011 22:44:24 PDT, Keith Curtis said: > However, it is common in companies to make an effort to get towards > zero bugs. Zero bugs is impossible, and that is a philosophical > discussion. If you look through your current list of bugs, nearly > every one looks scary to me and important to someone. You currently > have 2,800 active bugs (http://bit.ly/LinuxBugs) The last time I > looked, I found the median age was 10 months. In general, bugs should > be fixed in the next release and so therefore 3 months. You may want to look at what percentage of those bugs were reported on one hardware platform by one reporter, and the reporter has since evaporated. I myself started a thread back on April 26 regarding a wonky PS2->USB adapter. Within 24 hours I had a bunch of good suggestions for further debugging, none of which I've had a chance to actually follow up on (Hmm.. Monday is a holiday but nobody will be in the office, maybe I'll have a chance to get in the 4-5 reboots it will take.. :) So if I had opened a bug, how old is it, and who's fault is it that it's that old? > Hitting zero, even for a minute, could be a newsworthy event, as another way > Linux is better than the others. It also shows leadership to user mode. Never happen, as at least one of those 2,800 bugs will involve testing a fix on hardware the reporter no longer has, or the reporter is no longer available, or similar issues. You also need to look at the *severity* of the bugs - my USB issue merely causes me literally 5 second's inconvenience every morning (part of why I haven't chased it further - it's hard to justify spending 45 minutes fixing a 5-second issue). If the reporter can't be bothered to help, what are we supposed to do? Then there's the oops and panic reports that should count for a lot more. How severe are most of those 2,800 bugs? Probably a lot more productive than "zero bugs" would be "swat the top 10 entries in the kerneloops database", as we know by measurement that they're both pervasive and high-impact. --==_Exmh_1306506572_2736P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFN37VMcC3lWbTT17ARAquuAKDnK56B30s4NtwB0e+dsVPjlIet2wCg+LfK NbONx9snibaMrTm1LmHFiRU= =Up17 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1306506572_2736P-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756167Ab1E1WDk (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 May 2011 18:03:40 -0400 Received: from ist.d-labs.de ([213.239.218.44]:50143 "EHLO mx01.d-labs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753337Ab1E1WDj (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 May 2011 18:03:39 -0400 Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 00:03:25 +0200 From: Florian Mickler To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Keith Curtis Subject: Re: Zero bugs (was Re: (Short?) merge window reminder) Message-ID: <20110529000325.07f5633a@schatten.dmk.lab> In-Reply-To: <4265.1306506572@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> <4DDE81F4.8060800@panasas.com> <4265.1306506572@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.22.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 27 May 2011 10:29:32 -0400 Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Thu, 26 May 2011 22:44:24 PDT, Keith Curtis said: > > > However, it is common in companies to make an effort to get towards > > zero bugs. Zero bugs is impossible, and that is a philosophical > > discussion. If you look through your current list of bugs, nearly > > every one looks scary to me and important to someone. You currently > > have 2,800 active bugs (http://bit.ly/LinuxBugs) The last time I > > looked, I found the median age was 10 months. In general, bugs should > > be fixed in the next release and so therefore 3 months. > Besides the valid points Valdis gave, also many of the bugs (if they are severe/real world bugs) are already fixed. That is because the bugzilla is not the only place where bugs are reported and resolved and only the original submitter and some other people are able to close bugs. Most of the development happens on the mailinglist. So this is also where most of the bugs get solved. ( Mailinglists also have the advantage of automatically garbage collecting old bug reports nobody has any interest in solving. This is a big drawback with bugzilla. If there is too much garbage in the bugzilla because nobody closes bugs, then developers will not take old bugzilla reports seriously. ) So if you want to make the bugzilla more useful, just go for it and put relevant people on the cc list of ignored bug reports, ping people that have not answered to a specific question for months (the bugzilla looses notification mails sometimes).. And if you determine bugs that can be closed, drop me a line, I will be happy to do that, if it is appropriate. Regards, Flo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759390Ab1FAXtN (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2011 19:49:13 -0400 Received: from mail-gy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:62469 "EHLO mail-gy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759341Ab1FAXtJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2011 19:49:09 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=Yj6zHC0OihMGgvwQwCPcDJW7fWD5b8Hez3FeNToydM3zgHwJvDa2QGrQkR7jAzsn8s Pcjo+M3OQB8ZLh5/V2qDjbzQIgJ097tRwHcFsbU8fL5qn9UpVMnaQVBDhMN6E4so/50+ +TEKBKw/SSmDWHx6dmHv+QFY8enkmRkHryETc= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110529000325.07f5633a@schatten.dmk.lab> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> <4DDE81F4.8060800@panasas.com> <4265.1306506572@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <20110529000325.07f5633a@schatten.dmk.lab> Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 16:49:08 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Zero bugs (was Re: (Short?) merge window reminder) From: Keith Curtis To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello; I wrote two responses, which eventually allowed me to boil it down to one sentence: You can do anything you want in addition to perfection (i.e. zero bugs). Long answer: I was baptized into the zero bugs religion about 20 years ago. This was before the web and time-based releases, but these only add complications, and are yet compatible with zero bugs all the time. As a beginner, you can cheat such as zero bugs older than 6 months / 2 releases, or give yourself 1,000. Over time, you can pick new goals and improve your numbers. Reaching enlightenment may require multiple steps. You don't have to meet your goals, but you will become better for trying. Like other religions, zero bugs requires faith and diligence, but provides benefits at the end. In this religion, members spend regular time reading their bible / bug list. They find it a useful source of knowledge on how they can make themselves and the world better today. It also allowed them to figure out when they had too much work or needed help, and when they were done with their duties and could rest. Many will tell you that the more time they spend with their bible, the better it becomes. It is also a source of Numbers that the wise men would scratch their heads over. I have been watching your bug count for years and I realize now that you have the benefits of the religion, but not the faith and habits. When zero becomes an additional goal, the codebase will get better faster, and eventually the people happier. You may want better tools or release managers. It can also involve seeking a priest who can answer any questions of faith. I am not even ordained, but there are others. When your belief is tested, it can help to think of Knuth, Boeing, Debian, etc. It may be efficient to perform a mass exorcism / conversion. Please repent you amazing heathens. Zero bugs is like biking: I wouldn't try if weren't a goal, and I didn't believe it would be beneficial. I would have gone biking today but I had to get drunk to have the courage to send this. Mission accomplished & go Barcelona FC. I apologize if my mails come off as 0bvious rants, etc. I am in awe of what already exists, so part of me wants to be quiet rather than risk pissing off people that I write about and who inspire me. However, I've decided to share my work also, to speed the fun along. You can thank me later ;-) So, cheers. Happy to be here for the start of Linux 3. Kind regards, -Keith http://keithcu.com/ From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:23:20 -0700 Message-ID: <4DDAEC68.30803__24189.5357183695$1306194243$gmane$org@zytor.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com (terminus.zytor.com [198.137.202.10]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACAF29E78F for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 16:43:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: Ted Ts'o , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kern List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org On 05/23/2011 04:17 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. > That sounds like a good thing. -hpa From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ralf Baechle Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:48:39 +0100 Message-ID: <20110524144839.GC30117__9347.01162991605$1306311902$gmane$org@linux-mips.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from duck.linux-mips.net (h5.dl5rb.org.uk [81.2.74.5]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECCC39E732 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 08:14:39 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: Ted Ts'o , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kern List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 07:17:21PM -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. It will require another bunch of changes to scripts that try to make sense out of kernel Linux version numbers. It's a minor issue and we might be better off doing something else than version number magic. Not last a new major version number raises expectations - whatever those might be. Ralf From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:23:20 -0700 Message-ID: <4DDAEC68.30803__10839.3539245755$1306193070$gmane$org@zytor.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Ted Ts'o" , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.ker Return-path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:60455 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755773Ab1EWXYG (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 19:24:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/23/2011 04:17 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. > That sounds like a good thing. -hpa From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ralf Baechle Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:48:39 +0100 Message-ID: <20110524144839.GC30117__21749.9344413683$1306248600$gmane$org@linux-mips.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: "Ted Ts'o" , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.ker Return-path: Received: from h5.dl5rb.org.uk ([81.2.74.5]:50471 "EHLO duck.linux-mips.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752662Ab1EXOtX (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2011 10:49:23 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 07:17:21PM -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. It will require another bunch of changes to scripts that try to make sense out of kernel Linux version numbers. It's a minor issue and we might be better off doing something else than version number magic. Not last a new major version number raises expectations - whatever those might be. Ralf From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lukasz Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 09:20:06 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> <20110524154348.27ba649d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <1306426437.6981.14.camel@segulix> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:57059 "EHLO lo.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757391Ab1E0JkF (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2011 05:40:05 -0400 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QPtWW-0001rA-Dq for linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 27 May 2011 11:40:04 +0200 Received: from host81-139-112-239.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([81.139.112.239]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 27 May 2011 11:40:04 +0200 Received: from el.es.cr by host81-139-112-239.in-addr.btopenworld.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 27 May 2011 11:40:04 +0200 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: S=C3=A9rgio Basto serjux.com> writes: >=20 > Here it go my opinion, > Many people ask for beginning of 2.7 kernel series which will end on > 2.8, by old numeration.=20 > Kernel 2.8 will mainly a major clean up, of support of the very old > hardware, like "math co-processor" at only exist in 386 and before > Pentium. If some one want put Linux on this very old hardware should = use > kernel 2.2. On the contrary, I hope this never happens. Whatever the next 'step' will be, it should just keep going into the ri= ght=20 direction, as usual, no revolution please :) Release early, release oft= en and no 'numerology' or 'walling off'...=20 As per Linus' own words, the release schedule is not about features and it wasn't about features [since] forever... [at least since this workflow was adopted - 2.6.8 and the introduction of git ? ;) ] I like the d.r[.s][.lt] scheme (decade, release, stable, long-term), so basically, to convert 2.6 to 3 and leave the rest as is - no=20 big shock to existing infrastructure ;) But I also like the yy.mm[.ss][.lt] (year, month, stable, long-term) Or maybe a hybrid of these ? ly.mm[.ss][.lt] (linux_year, month, stable, long term, where linux_year =3D linux_decade + year-2000 and month in both of these =3D month_in_year of release So that : the 2.6.39-rcX process continues for now, and in time to cut off, it gets renamed to 3.0 or 3.1 and then stable and lt adds their part,=20 or 11.07 (provided the release happened in July) (and then stable, lt part= s add) or 14.07 (11+3).(july)[.stable][.longterm] but in all 3 cases there is a merge window ending with 3.0-rc1 or 11.07-rc1 or 14.07-rc1 and in case of months used in here, say next cycle has 7 weeks, so the next major release will be 11.09 or 14.09 and so on; Because the release cycle probably never had less than 4 weeks, using the month is imho reasonable. > However a new numeration of kernel is independent of this, and I agre= e > with new numeration of kernel on drop a number.=20 > Last but not least, I would like to see marked a hiper stable kernel = , > which will be used by Debian guys. Debian guys tend to stop in a kern= el > which is not the best one, so let we choose for them what is the stab= le > of stables . That as well is probably never gonna happen ;) the kernel is more stabl= e with each release anyway, _because_ of the 'no thresholds' approach. And Debian probably have their own reasons for ending up with old kerne= ls, like out-of-tree patches that don't get merged but need to be ported wh= ich is no easy job... and so on. >=20 > Best regards,=20 u 2, Kind Regards, L. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel= " in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B69EE6B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 15:25:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 21:25:25 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Greg KH , Andrew Morton On Mon, 23 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. So the voices tell you to avoid .42 ? Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B844E6B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 15:13:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-ew0-f41.google.com (mail-ew0-f41.google.com [209.85.215.41]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp1.linux-foundation.org (8.14.2/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id p4NJDq0w006025 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 12:13:54 -0700 Received: by ewy9 with SMTP id 9so2818045ewy.14 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 12:13:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 12:13:29 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: (Short?) merge window reminder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm Cc: Greg KH , Andrew Morton So I've been busily merging stuff, and just wanted to send out a quick reminder that I warned people in the 39 announcement that this might be a slightly shorter merge window than usual, so that I can avoid having to make the -rc1 release from Japan using my slow laptop (doing "allyesconfig" builds on that thing really isn't in the cards, and I like to do those to verify things - even if we've already had a few cases where arch include differences made it less than effective in finding problems). And judging by the merge window so far, that early close (probably Sunday - I'll be on airplanes next Monday) looks rather likely. I already seem to have a fairly sizable portion of linux-next in my tree, and there haven't been any huge upsets. So anybody who was planning a last-minute "please pull" - this is a heads-up. Don't do it, you might miss the window entirely. Did I miss any major development mailing lists with stuff pending? Linus PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to do things, I listen. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 368626B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 16:52:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by qwa26 with SMTP id 26so4374574qwa.14 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 13:52:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 00:52:14 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder From: Alexey Zaytsev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 00:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. > > But we'll see. Maybe, 2011.x, or 11.x, x increasing for every merge window started this year? This would better reflect the steady nature of the releases, but would certainly break a lot of scripts. ;) -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4713B6B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 17:59:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by wyf19 with SMTP id 19so5980510wyf.14 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 14:59:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 23:59:17 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder From: Oliver Pinter Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On 5/23/11, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) I think, the best time for this, after reorganize the ARM arch folder / tree. > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. > > But we'll see. > > Linus > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A7D2A6B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 18:41:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 15:21:21 -0700 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110523222121.GD12777@suse.de> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. I like that, it would make things much easier for me to keep track of stuff. > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. > > There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers > based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to > start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. That sounds reasonable as well. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED3516B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 19:10:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by iwg8 with SMTP id 8so7407673iwg.14 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 16:10:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 19:10:21 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder From: "jonsmirl@gmail.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. Could we set a goal of having 3.0 be the first release with a totally cleaned up ARM arch? That would give everyone a good target to work towards. -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@gmail.com -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 56DDE6B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 19:21:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:21:43 -0700 From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-Id: <20110523162143.fdf2f2a7.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Ted Ts'o Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On Mon, 23 May 2011 19:17:21 -0400 Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. It's just another little thing to break several scripts... --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail6.bemta7.messagelabs.com (mail6.bemta7.messagelabs.com [216.82.255.55]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E226B0022 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 19:23:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:23:20 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Ted Ts'o , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On 05/23/2011 04:17 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. > That sounds like a good thing. -hpa -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail6.bemta12.messagelabs.com (mail6.bemta12.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.247]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E15276B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 19:40:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 17:40:04 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110523234003.GC26392@parisc-linux.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523222121.GD12777@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523222121.GD12777@suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Greg KH Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 03:21:21PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > I like that, it would make things much easier for me to keep track of > stuff. As long as 3.14 turns into a long-term support kernel and gets up to 159 ... In all serious, I'm very supportive of this move. I'm heartily sick of people claiming "we have version 2.6 support" when they really mean they haven't updated since version 2.6.9. Yeah, congratulations, you're seven years out of date. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail6.bemta12.messagelabs.com (mail6.bemta12.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.247]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6DB96B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 19:34:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f41.google.com (mail-vw0-f41.google.com [209.85.212.41]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp1.linux-foundation.org (8.14.2/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id p4NNXXv5028059 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 16:33:33 -0700 Received: by vws4 with SMTP id 4so6559315vws.14 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 16:33:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> <4DDAEC68.30803@zytor.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:33:12 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Ted Ts'o , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also numbers" transition much more natural. Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being development trees. But if I do 3.0, then I'd be chucking that whole thing out the window, and the next release would be 3.1, 3.2, etc.. And then in another few years (probably before getting close to 3.40, so I'm not going to make a big deal of 3 = "third decade"), I'd just do 4.0 etc. Because all our releases are supposed to be stable releases these days, and if we get rid of one level of numbering, I feel perfectly fine with getting rid of the even/odd history too. Linus -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 897A36B0012 for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 21:25:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QOgMq-0007IC-QS for linux-mm@kvack.org; Tue, 24 May 2011 03:25:05 +0200 Received: from 50-47-173-54.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net ([50.47.173.54]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 03:25:04 +0200 Received: from yuhongbao_386 by 50-47-173-54.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 03:25:04 +0200 From: Yuhong Bao Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 21:41:46 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: linux-mm@kvack.org Linus Torvalds linux-foundation.org> writes: > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. > > But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a > fairly nice round number. So why not start Linux 2.7 or Linux 2.9? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47AD96B0011 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 10:48:40 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:48:39 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder Message-ID: <20110524144839.GC30117@linux-mips.org> References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523231721.GM10009@thunk.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Ted Ts'o , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 07:17:21PM -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. It will require another bunch of changes to scripts that try to make sense out of kernel Linux version numbers. It's a minor issue and we might be better off doing something else than version number magic. Not last a new major version number raises expectations - whatever those might be. Ralf -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DEAB26B0012 for ; Wed, 25 May 2011 10:12:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 17:12:47 +0300 From: Boaz Harrosh MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Alexey Zaytsev , Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On 05/23/2011 11:52 PM, Alexey Zaytsev wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 00:33, Linus Torvalds > wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. >> >> But no, it wouldn't be for 42. Despite THHGTTG, I think "40" is a >> fairly nice round number. >> >> There's also the timing issue - since we no longer do version numbers >> based on features, but based on time, just saying "we're about to >> start the third decade" works as well as any other excuse. >> >> But we'll see. > > Maybe, 2011.x, or 11.x, x increasing for every merge window started this year? > This would better reflect the steady nature of the releases, but would > certainly break a lot of scripts. ;) My $0.017 on this. Clearly current process is time based. People have said. * Keep Three digit numbers to retain script compatibility * Make it clear from the version when it was released. * Linus said 3 as for 3rd decade * Nice single increment number progression * Please make it look like a nice version number sys-admins will feel at home with So if you combine all the above: D. Y. N D - Is the decade since birth (1991 not 1990) Y - is the year in the decade so you have 3.1.x, 3.2.x, .. 3.10.x, 4.1.X and so on Nice incremental number. N - The Linus release of this Year. So this 3rd one goes up to 4 most probably. Linus always likes, and feels very poetic about the Christmas version release. He hates it when once it slipped into the next year. So now he gets to increment the second digit as a bonus. The 2nd digit gets to start on a *one*, never zero and goes up to *10*, to symbolize the 1991 birth. And we never have .zero quality, right? The first Digit gets incremented on decade from 1991 so on 2011 and not 2010 So here you have it, who said we need to compromise? Free life Boaz -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 01A446B0011 for ; Thu, 26 May 2011 12:38:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4DDE81F4.8060800@panasas.com> Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 19:38:12 +0300 From: Boaz Harrosh MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: (Short?) merge window reminder References: <20110523192056.GC23629@elte.hu> <4DDD0E5F.5080105@panasas.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tony Luck Cc: Alexey Zaytsev , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, DRI , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Greg KH On 05/26/2011 01:21 AM, Tony Luck wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >> So if you combine all the above: >> >> D. Y. N >> D - Is the decade since birth (1991 not 1990) >> Y - is the year in the decade so you have 3.1.x, 3.2.x, .. 3.10.x, 4.1.X and so on >> Nice incremental number. >> N - The Linus release of this Year. So this 3rd one goes up to 4 most probably. >> >> Linus always likes, and feels very poetic about the Christmas version release. >> He hates it when once it slipped into the next year. So now he gets to increment >> the second digit as a bonus. >> >> The 2nd digit gets to start on a *one*, never zero and goes up to *10*, to symbolize >> the 1991 birth. And we never have .zero quality, right? >> >> The first Digit gets incremented on decade from 1991 so on 2011 and not 2010 > > This is clearly the best suggestion so far - small numbers, somewhat > date related (but without stuffing a "2011." on the front). No ".0" > releases, ever. > > But best of all it defines now when we will switch to 4.x.y and 5.x.y > so we don't have to keep having this discussion whenever someone thinks > that the numbers are getting "too big" (well perhaps when we get to the > tenth decade or so :-) > > So the only thing left to argue is whether the upcoming release should > be numbered "3.1.1" as the first release in the first year of the 3rd > decade ... or whether we should count 2.6.37 .. 2.6.39 as the first > three releases this year and thus we ought to start with "3.1.4" (so we > start with "pi"!). > Yes, Yes I like this a lot. I love pi, thanks. Boaz > Linus: If you go with this, you should let Boaz set the new "NAME" > as a prize for such an inspired solution. > > -Tony -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org