Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering

Barry K. Nathan
2005-03-03T16:02:00Z

On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 02:21:38PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So the suggestion on the table would be to go back to even/odd, but do it
> at the "micro-level" of single releases, rather than make it a two- or
> three-year release cycle.

[WARNING: At this point I have pulled an all-nighter, for reasons
unrelated to Linux. I may not be making sense anymore. This will
probably be my last post in this thread for today, or maybe even
forever.]

Is a 1:1 ratio necessarily the correct one? IOW, maybe alternatives like
the following should be considered (S = stable, ES = extra-stable, EES =
extra-extra-stable):

| odd/even | ES every 5th | S, ES, EES, ...
---------------------------------------------------
2.6.11 | S | S | S
2.6.12 | ES | S | ES
2.6.13 | S | S | S (align for EES on divisible by 3)
2.6.14 | ES | S | ES
2.6.15 | S | ES | EES
2.6.16 | ES | S | S
2.6.17 | S | S | ES
2.6.18 | ES | S | EES
2.6.19 | S | S | S
2.6.20 | ES | ES | ES
2.6.21 | S | S | EES
2.6.22 | ES | S | S
...

e.g. if odd/even causes too many long releases or other problems like
that, then something like the middle column (every Nth release is
extra-stable, for N >= 3) could be tried.

-Barry K. Nathan <barryn@pobox.com>