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.
Thread beginning with comment 474411
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: date based
by Alfman on Tue 24th May 2011 21:09 UTC in reply to "date based"
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

"There also some prominent linux'rs that propose the date based version number scheme... like Linux 2011/11/25"

That's what I use to label my software releases. The numbers aren't usually meaningful anyways, today software gets updated with new features all the time.

Version numbers often seem to be more about marketing than anything else.


But please don't use '/' characters!


How about "Linux 2011-11-25-mainline-stable"?
For typical users, who couldn't care less, it might be truncated to "Linux winter 2011", would this be bad?

A: Is your hardware supported under Linux?
B: Yes, a driver is available for Linux 2011, September and up.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: date based
by ggeldenhuys on Tue 24th May 2011 21:50 in reply to "RE: date based"
ggeldenhuys Member since:
2006-11-13

How about "Linux 2011-11-25-mainline-stable"?
For typical users, who couldn't care less, it might be truncated to "Linux winter 2011", would this be bad?


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

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 That makes windows sound very old and outdated. Now compare that to saying Windows Server 7 in the year 2011 - that doesn't sound old any more. Just a perception thing I guess. ;-)

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

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: date based
by Alfman on Wed 25th May 2011 01:08 in reply to "RE[2]: date based"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

"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

RE[2]: date based
by Delgarde on Tue 24th May 2011 22:31 in reply to "RE: date based"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

How about "Linux 2011-11-25-mainline-stable"?
For typical users, who couldn't care less, it might be truncated to "Linux winter 2011", would this be bad?


Yes, for two reasons. One, because summer and winter are reversed in the southern hemisphere. And two, because it's somewhat ambiguous whether "winter 2011" was released in January 2011, or in December 2011.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: date based
by lemur2 on Wed 25th May 2011 01:20 in reply to "RE[2]: date based"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"How about "Linux 2011-11-25-mainline-stable"? For typical users, who couldn't care less, it might be truncated to "Linux winter 2011", would this be bad?
Yes, for two reasons. One, because summer and winter are reversed in the southern hemisphere. And two, because it's somewhat ambiguous whether "winter 2011" was released in January 2011, or in December 2011. "

Where I come from, it doesn't matter if it was was released in January 2011 or in December 2011, it would still be called "summer 2011".

But you knew that.

The only date-based schemes that would work worldwide are "yyyy-mm-dd" or "yyyy-mm". These schemes have the added advantage that they sort correctly as ASCII strings.

Reply Parent Score: 2