From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753220Ab0JVV5T (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2010 17:57:19 -0400 Received: from claw.goop.org ([74.207.240.146]:42830 "EHLO claw.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752904Ab0JVV5R (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2010 17:57:17 -0400 Message-ID: <4CC208BA.2080506@goop.org> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 14:57:14 -0700 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100921 Fedora/3.1.4-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Al Viro CC: kevin granade , "Artem S. Tashkinov" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: On Linux numbering scheme References: <18536664.253751287691209904.JavaMail.root@mail-zbox20.bo3.lycos.com> <28654042.253821287691362834.JavaMail.root@mail-zbox20.bo3.lycos.com> <20101022020006.GF19804@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20101022020006.GF19804@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/21/2010 07:00 PM, 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? > > Al, fully expecting to be whined at for discouraging potential contributors > and horribly damaging Linux ecosystem by artificially increasing the entry > barrier, or something... I think it should be blue. J