Re: 3.0.0 kernel

[Thomas Boxley <thomas@thomasboxley.me>]

Jason Schindler hit the nail on the head. Version numbers are usually a
very big deal in the public opinion, just ask Mozilla, with it's Firefox
5.0 release in June already.

I think they should take the step to 3.0. When I first started using
Linux, I was somewhat surprised at the low version number, even after 17
years of development. I know version numbers are usually kept low in all
FOSS projects, but when you do have something as big and popular as the
Linux kernel itself, and when you realize that most people associate
version numbers with project maturity, version 3.0 would be a step in
the right direction.

-- 
Thanks,
Thomas Boxley
<http://thomasboxley.me>

On 05/30/2011 12:21 PM, Corey Lanier wrote:
> I guess I don't really see all the fuss in whether or not there will ever be
> a 3.0.0 kernel. As long as linux continues to develop and make the advances
> it has been, then the fuss over etymology is irrelevant.
> 
> I also highly doubt Linux will require the major rewrite for 3.0.0 anytime
> soon. But whatever makes the kernel better, I'm all for.
> 
> On May 30, 2011 1:14 PM, "Jason M. Schindler" <jschindler@bucket440.com>
> wrote:
>> The answer to "what's in a name" is sometimes surprising when dealing with
>> version numbers. People (or at the very least, any customer I've worked
>> with) tend to attach big meanings to version numbers of products. "It's
>> only version 1.2? But you've been working on it for 6 months!"
>>
>> I like to think of major version changes as the time to cut backwards
>> compatibility for the bad ideas of the past. Most customers recognize
>> that when the big number changes, it means there might be some pain
>> involved in updating.
>>
>>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#Political_and_cultural_significance_of_version_numbers
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 10:43 -0500, Steve Reindl wrote:
>>>
>>>> I remember reading somewhere, not too awful long ago some FUD about
>>>> never seeing a 3.0 kernel because the 2.6 kernel was so mature.
>>>> Apparently Linus is having none of it.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTUwMg
>>>
>>>
>>> A rose by any other name -- formerly known as kernel 2.6.40. It has
>>> nothing really that special or innovative over kernel 2.6.39.
>>>
>>> --Doc
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
>> "unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.
> 




-
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
"unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.