Re: On Linux numbering scheme

[Athanasius <link@miggy.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1183 bytes --]

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 03:00:06AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 07:06:23PM -0500, kevin granade wrote:
> 
> > Any particular reason not to continue the date-oriented format and
> > have the third number be the numerical representation of the month
> > rather than an incrementing numbering of the releases?  It would still
> > be monotonically increasing, which is the only requirement, right?
> 
> Why do we need to change it, anyway?

  /agree

  For the most part it's only distribution maintainers that see or care
about the kernel version number anyway.  Anyone else knows what they're
getting into if they compile a kernel themselves, and otherwise is more
likely to say they're using "Linux 10.10" right now ....

  Having said that I had a lovely suggestion in the last round on this
topic which would allow you to know when a kernel was released just from
its version number :).

-- 
- Athanasius = Athanasius(at)miggy.org / http://www.miggy.org/
                  Finger athan(at)fysh.org for PGP key
	   "And it's me who is my enemy. Me who beats me up.
Me who makes the monsters. Me who strips my confidence." Paula Cole - ME

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]