From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261414AbVCCAOc (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:14:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261389AbVCCALQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:11:16 -0500 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([194.106.48.114]:45036 "EHLO tim.rpsys.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261320AbVCCAHi (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:07:38 -0500 Message-ID: <08b301c51f84$fecae0e0$0f01a8c0@max> From: "Richard Purdie" To: "Linus Torvalds" , "Kernel Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: Kernel release numbering Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 00:06:56 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds: > Namely that we could adopt the even/odd numbering scheme that we used > to do on a minor number basis, and instead of dropping it entirely like > we did, we could have just moved it to the release number, as an > indication > of what was the intent of the release. How about taking the idea a bit further and have two active versions. Eg: now 2.6.11 is out, new changes go into a 2.6.13 series. Any changes to make 2.6.11 (more :) stable go into a 2.6.12 series which is stability/security/whatever improvements rather than devel work. This way you can shorten the length of the time the odd series spends in -rc and can spend more time accepting patches rather than having long periods where developers queue them. Distributors are encouraged to use the even numbers including the even -rc versions and to give feedback as to what stability/whatever patches need adding to the even series to keep them happy. Just an idea... Regards, Richard