On Wed, 10 May 2000, Deven T. Corzine wrote:
> An idea for a "variation on the theme" for version numbers occurred to me a
> while back, but with 2.4 coming soon, this seems like an opportune time to
> suggest it and see if anyone likes it...
> I'd like to extend this further by adding a digit to development
> version numbers representing the current phase of the development cycle.
Well, the way I see Linux Kernel development for past years, the
suggested numbering does not reflect the way kernel is developed.
We have something like, we add bunch new patches, stabilize thing so it is
usable, then add another bunch of patches, again stabilize things a bit,
then yet another bunch of patches, and so on during a single new kernel
development cycle. Also patches are submited at various stages of
devlopment. This is possible since some of them are developed outside of
kernel, we we as well end up having a bunch of new patches at end of
development. Finally, "disasterous kernels" happen at ANY stage of
development. For example the 2.3.99-pre2 was corrupting data for me. And
this is supposedly stable kernel.
-- Adam http://www.eax.com The Supreme Headquarters of the 32 bit registers- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 15 2000 - 21:00:15 EST