From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752044Ab3KDRps (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 4 Nov 2013 12:45:48 -0500
Received: from h1446028.stratoserver.net ([85.214.92.142]:46900 "EHLO
	mail.ahsoftware.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750719Ab3KDRpr convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 4 Nov 2013 12:45:47 -0500
Message-ID: <5277D2C3.3020203@ahsoftware.de>
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 18:00:51 +0100
From: Alexander Holler <holler@ahsoftware.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130805 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 3.12 released .. and no merge window yet .. and 4.0 plans?
References: <CA+55aFwLkvSkparyvekdmMyvr6Srw1KkzTBp=_w0oQRWnPpJug@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwLkvSkparyvekdmMyvr6Srw1KkzTBp=_w0oQRWnPpJug@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Am 04.11.2013 01:10, schrieb Linus Torvalds:

(...)
> Onto a totally different topic: we're getting to release numbers where
> I have to take off my socks to count that high again. I'm ok with
> 3.<low teens>, but I don't want us to get to the kinds of crazy
> numbers we had in the 2.x series, so at some point we're going to cut
> over from 3.x to 4.x, just to keep the numbers small and easy to
> remember. We're not there yet, but I would actually prefer to not go
> into the twenties, so I can see it happening in a year or so, and
> we'll have 4.0 follow 3.19 or something like that.
>
> Now, it's just a number (since we've long since given up on
> feature-related releases), and it's at least a year away, so why do I
> even mention it at all?
(...)
> Comments?

You could go towards the lovely number Pi (π):

3.12
3.13
3.14
3.141
3.1415
3.14159
3.141592
3.1415926
(...)
4.0

That would

- not be crazy numbers,
- make some math loving people happy,
- make people remembering that number,
- be a test for broken version number parsers,
- not as boring as usual version numbers,
- be in good tradition (e.g. TeX),
- make some maintainers hate me for that suggestion, ;)
- ...

Regards,

Alexander Holler