On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:48:37AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
quoted text
> 
> On Thursday 2008-07-17 10:51, el es wrote:
> 
> >Hello,
> >inspired by the bikeshed painting contest, I got the following idea :
> >
> >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.
> 
> >Take a hypotetical new-scheme 2.8.30 release (roughly the current
> >2.6.26, didn't count these weeks). Linus starts to accumulate
> >patches for 2.8.30-rcX as usual, and when he is ready to release,
> >puts the release week number instead of 30 - let's assume it is a
> >2.8.40 then, more or less. By the time, the stable team produces
> >2.8.30.[32,34,36,38,40 and so on]. If the weeks leap into the next
> >year, stable team puts e.g. 2.8.30.9.01 (yy.ww).
> 
> -stable usually overlaps with master. But I don't like version
> numbers long as binutils and "2.8.30.9.01" have.

also, causes trouble when stable releases cross a year boundary, or
when there are several ones in a week. The stable release should
only be a counter, not a date.

Willy

--
unsubscribe notice
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/