Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering

Greg KH
2005-03-04T19:48:22Z

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 11:12:22AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> But automation takes time to build up and learn, and in the meantime doing
> it by hand and learning early is definitely the right thing to do. Maybe
> you doing it by hand just makes it clear that I was wrong about the need
> for some strict rules that are automatically enforced in the first place.

Heh, it will have to be done by hand for a while, as I don't think any
of us want to write a kernel-patch-managemement-system in our spare
time. Although, I do know that osdl's PLM at one time was planned to be
such a tool, I'll go kick the developers over there to see what they
say...

> > And if you disagree, what _should_ we call it? "-sucker" isn't good, as
> > it only describes the people creating the tree, not any of the users :)
>
> Let's try with the 2.6.x.y numbering scheme, it's simple, and maybe it
> ends up being sufficient. I just wanted to bring up the point that I don't
> think the sucker tree _has_ to be seen as a 2.6.x.y tree at all.

Fair enough, I'll stick with 2.6.x.y, as I think it's a good
representation of what people expect. If people start objecting, I'm
always open for change.

thanks,

greg k-h