Re: Kernel version : what about s.yy.ww.tt scheme ?

["Justin Mattock" <justinmattock@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:38 AM, el es <el_es_cr@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Jan Engelhardt <jengelh <at> medozas.de> writes:
>
>> >The scheme to be s.yy.ww.tt, that is :
>> >
>> >s - series, as it is now (freedom to Linus to bump it to 3 when BKL is removed
>> >for example ;) )
>> >yy - two (in a hundred years, three) digits of the year
>> >Now the interesting part begins which is
>> >ww - the number of the week of the release. This will be between 1 and 52 (53)
>> >tt - the number of the week of stable release. As above.
>>
>> Interesting idea.
>>
>
> Thanks :)
>
>> -stable usually overlaps with master. But I don't like version
>> numbers long as binutils and "2.8.30.9.01" have.
>
> Yes, master and stable accumulate the same patches, I know. Only master takes
> new code, whereas -stable does not.
>
> This however tells how long did it take to produce the -stable release out of
> Linus's release ;) And it does not break the current habits - just abuses them a
> bit ;)
> And tells you how long the version was around there without another -stable
> release too. Just by looking onto the version string, quick, sortable in
> meaningful way, all sorts of pluses there ;)
>
> IMO, the kernel is so mature already, and the development is so fast, and the
> changes not always so fundamental, that the version in the old sense becomes
> irrelevant - it is not the 2.4->2.6 transition days any more ;)
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Lukasz (btw sorry I forgot to sign myself last time ;)
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

What about how porsch does it
i.g. 911, 912, 913, 914

-- 
Justin P. Mattock