Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change

Randy Dunlap
2008-10-17T04:54:23Z

On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 21:02:39 -0700 Greg KH wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 08:16:26PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 08:47:26AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > You miss the best alternative:
> >
> > Simply keep the status quo.
>
> I'd argue that is is a pain. Linus has expressed frustration with the
> current numbering scheme, and as someone who deals with kernel version
> numbers every single day, I too am mildly frustrated.
>
> I think the main reason why is just that small numbers are easier to
> keep track of in your mind. As we are ever increasing the version
> number, the release numbers feel like they are getting closer together,
> making them less distinguishable.
>
> For example, think of the following:
> 2.6.5 vs. 2.6.9
> Your mind focuses on the 5 and 9, and in thinking about them, it is much
> easier to keep them apart.
>
> Now, try the same with:
> 2.6.24 vs. 2.6.27
> You are repeating the tens digit, the "two", so it is a bit harder to
> distinguish things. After a few years of this, it gets more difficult
>
> So I proposed an alternative, YEAR.NUMBER. The year is easy to keep
> track of, and the release number is a small one, making it too easier to
> track and distinguish from each other:
> 2009.1 vs. 2009.5
> or
> 2010.2 vs. 2011.5
> It also means something that lets you remember back to what was going on
> for that release better, if you can easily place it within a specific
> time frame, which is important for those of us who work with different
> kernel versions all the time for different projects and backports and
> stable releases.
>
> If the number stays the same, my feeble brain will survive and I'll just
> rely on my huge spreadsheet of when specific kernels were released when
> to get along, and hopefully I will not make any more .26.5 releases when
> I mean .25.5 and such like I have in the past :)

Nah, that can/will still happen (for someone).

I still fail to see what is br0ken and needs to be fixed...

---
~Randy