[RFC] 2.[34] numbering and locations (was: Re: [SPOILER] Don't read if you don't like spoilers !)

From: Arne Thomassen (arneth@Pool.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE)
Date: Fri May 26 2000 - 10:02:07 EST

On 25 May 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> Followup to: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10005252047590.21253-100000@holmes.informatik.rwth-aachen.de>
> By author: Arne Thomassen <arneth@Pool.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > Now the poor kernel.org people to fix their scripts again. "finger
> > @finger.kernel.org" still gives:
> >
> > The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is: 2.2.15
> > The latest beta version of the Linux kernel is: 2.3.99-pre9
> > The latest prepatch (alpha) version *appears* to be: 2.3.99/10-3
> >
> > Wasn't it bad enough to see 2.3.99pre9-pre5? Now we'll get
> > 2.4.0-test2-pre1-pre4! :-) How about the idea (someone mentioned) to
> > release a 2.3.99 and then open a 2.3.100 tree? "2.4.0-test1" may look like
> > a marketing gag, and reading lkml makes me believe 2.4.0-final is still
> > some (a few) months away.
> >
> 2.4.0-test1 is really 2.3.99-pre10.3.

not really (just to produce more confusion). Have you diff'ed them? (Or
simply look at compressed patch size: 85k vs. 83k.)

> But yes, it causes us some serious pain every time the naming scheme changes.

So currently we have some pre-pre stuff in the testing/ folder,
a developmental 2.4.0-test1 in the 2.4/ folder (which should only have
"stable" kernels, like 2.2/), and people/alan/2.4.0test/ with some
2.4.0-test1-ac kernel. What a nice chaos... ;-) Could you (Linus,
Alan, ...) please consider the following:

- Put further developmental kernels into the testing/ and 2.3/
directories, may they come from Linus or Alan; if Linus doesn't like this,
create a testing-ac/ directory at the same level for his vacation time.

- Please stop producing test1-ac.x-pre.y; give a 2.3.99, then go to
2.3.100-pre (only one "pre" level;-), 2.3.100, 2.3.101-pre, etc.

- Take the instable 2.4.0-test1 out of the 2.4/ folder, which should be
for stable stuff only. Putting it there seems to be a bad marketing gag.
(To be precise: bad marketing _and_ bad gag;-) It should go into the 2.3/
directory, just like 2.2.0-pre.x kernels are in 2.1/.

The simpler you keep the numbering and locations, the more testers you
get, and the better are the results - which probably is what we all

Best wishes

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 : Wed May 31 2000 - 21:00:16 EST