Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change

[Alexandre Oliva <oliva@lsd.ic.unicamp.br>]

On Oct 18, 2008, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@kernel.org> wrote:

> Greg KH wrote:
>> What is the "problem" of predicting future releases?  What relies on the
>> actual number being "correct" some random time in the future?

> We already have the 2.6.28-rc series; and we are already talking about
> 2.6.29 features.

Just do like car manufacturers.  When it's 2008, you can already shop
around their 2009 models.  Linux could do the same.  We could right
now decide that 2.6.29 is going to be 2009.1 (or 9.1, or 2.9.1,
whatever), and then, even if it's still 2008 when it goes out, so
what?

(The 2.6.28 cycle has already started, so it's probably easier to just
leave it alone)

> We *really* don't want 2008.3-rc4 to be followed by 2009.1-rc5.
> That is the kind of stuff that make script makers want to strangle
> developers alive with their own intestines.

+1

Not that I care one way or the other.  It's just that I don't see how
your response bears any relationship with the point Greg made.  It's
just a distraction.  We're talking about how to label releases, not
about guessing the release date of a kernel months ahead.  One you
label it, it stays that way.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member       ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}