From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>
Cc: Zenghui Yu <zenghuiyu96@gmail.com>,
corbet@lwn.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/process/howto: Update for 4.x -> 5.x versioning
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2019 13:54:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190224125449.GC10876@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4160738.QP7Yp4kBzP@harkonnen>
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 11:16:56AM +0100, Federico Vaga wrote:
> hello,
>
> I have just a general observation for the community, not related to the
> content of this patch, but related with the idea behind.
>
> Is it really important to specify the major release number in the documents? .
> Can't we just use a generic x.y.z, or a more generic statement?
>
> When you open a documentation page like
>
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/
>
> you will see the release number in the top left corner, which implies that
> what you read is (should be) valid for that version. And if you read from the
> sources you should know which version you checked out, and if you don't you
> can always verify.
>
> I do not see the added value of having those numbers in the documents, unless
> the purpose is to highlight some specific exceptions.
>
> Am I missing some important reasons that justify these numbers?
Nothing really, it's just "history". Given that the "major" number only
changes every 3-4 years, it's not all that big of a deal.
If you can think of a way to write these documents such that they do not
depend on a version number at all, I'm sure no one would object to those
patches.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-24 12:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-24 8:43 [PATCH] Documentation/process/howto: Update for 4.x -> 5.x versioning Zenghui Yu
2019-02-24 10:16 ` Federico Vaga
2019-02-24 12:54 ` Greg KH [this message]
2019-02-24 12:53 ` Greg KH
2019-02-24 15:25 ` Zenghui Yu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190224125449.GC10876@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zenghuiyu96@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox