Rene Herman wrote:And that's why after the adoption of generics and a few things java all the sudden became java 5. I don't like that. I hope the world gets used to learning things instead of just being driven by a pretty number. And I think that not using marketing numbers on a popular software is a good step into helping people realise that version numbers are meant to keep track of the changes not to look cool. I rather just have good books around. I can bet that all -- or at least most of -- those new "LINUX 3!" books would suck. So it's better if they sell little or not sell at all. Well, if 2.6.0 was 3.0 (2003.0) then people would easily realise that they're missing 5 years of kernel development. Given that hint, if they take a look on a few Changelogs they'll soon find out they're missing on quite a lot. Well, it is software versioning and not Gisele Bündchen taking off her top. --
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 006/196] Chinese: add translation of oops-tracing.txt |
| Eric Sandeen | Re: [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
| YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / | request_module: runaway loop modprobe net-pf-1 (is Re: Linux 2.6.21-rc1) |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Ben Greear | Re: MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with multiple bridge virtual... |
| Rafael J. Wysocki | 2.6.29-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.28 |
