Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Tue 24th May 2011 14:38 UTC, submitted by Debjit
Linux "So far. we have seen 39 development cycles of Linux 2.6 and the 40th is about to start. However, Linux 2.6.39 might be the end of the Linux 2.6 series. In an email, Linus Torvalds wrote that the numbers are becoming too big and he might [be] thinking of giving the next release a version number of 2.8.0. [...] In the ensuing discussion, Torvalds wrote that a version number of 3.0 is also a strong possibility", as a natural way to introduce a new numbering scheme where odd numbers are also used for stable releases and feature releases increment the second digit.
Permalink for comment 474442
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: date based
by Alfman on Wed 25th May 2011 01:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: date based"
Member since:

"Yes, because there are people like myself living in the southern hemisphere, where November is summer, not winter. :-)"

Gosh you're right!

"Using years as a version number just seems bad to me. That will make software very quickly dated. Example, running Windows Server 2008 in the year 2011. That makes windows sound very old and outdated."

I honestly don't see how this is a problem?

"I say, stick with major.minor numbers and be done with it."

The arbitrariness doesn't bug you? At least the date gives us an idea of the age.

My car is a 2.36 Toyota Corolla.

Reply Parent Score: 2