On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 23:46:22 -0500 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If Linus/DaveM really don't like -pre/-rc naming, I think 2.6.x.y is preferable to even/odd.
All of these arguments are circular. If people think that even/odd will devalue odd releases, guess what 2.6.x.y will do? By that line of reasoning nobody will test 2.6.x just the same as they aren't testing 2.6.x-rc* right now.
even/odd means that certain releases (even ones) are more magical than others. That's weird, since users aren't used to that sort of thing in any other project.
2.6.x.y and 2.6.x-rc [where rc == serious bugfixes only!] are understandable to users, because they have seen that sort of thing before.
Users _aren't_ fooled by naming games. The current 2.6-rc proves that.
I think they will test the odd releases, because as a real release they will get slashdot/lwn.net/etc. announcements.
That's one of the major things the -rc's don't get. Maybe it gets a reference in lwn.net's weekly kernel article, but mostly kernel geeks read those and that's not who we want testing -rc's (such geeks already are doing so).
LWN, Slashdot and others will not be fooled though :) They will note that release 2.6.<odd> is not a real release.
It has to be a "real" release. That does have an impact. However, I am ambivalent about how to make them real. Even/odd, 2.6.x.y, either is fine with me.
2.6.x.y has a very real engineering benefit: it becomes a stable release branch. That will encourage even more users to test it, over and above a simple release naming change.
Users have been clamoring for a stable release branch in any case, as you see from comments about Alan's -ac and an LKML user's -as kernels.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
