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 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