Skip to contentSkip to conversation

New versioning scheme ? ( 2.6.8.1 )

DISCUSSION xerces8 4 participants 4 messages Aug 15, 2004 – Aug 16, 2004

lore
Share & tools
lore

xerces8

author
#0 lore raw

Hi!

Can someone tell me why the ages old, established versioning scheme of x.y.z was "abolished" and x.y.z.w was introduced ?

Regards,
David Balazic

#1 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · On Saturday 14 August 2004 22:04, xerces8 wrote:

Hi!

Can someone tell me why the ages old, established versioning scheme of x.y.z was "abolished" and x.y.z.w was introduced ?

Regards,
David Balazic

It wasn't abolished, there was a showstopper problem discovered before the ink was dry on the original announcment of 2.6.8. Thats (the .1) the fixed release.

Stuff happens. To me, thats a very minor concern. My 11 year old Shelty friend and pet took sick and died a horrible death all in about 4 hours today while we were unable to locate a vet who was available on a Saturday. So an instant fix .1 release is very minor to me.

Signature · 8 lines
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.24% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
#2 lore raw
In reply to xerces8
Quoted 4 lines · On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 04:04:09AM +0200, xerces8 wrote:

Hi!

Can someone tell me why the ages old, established versioning scheme of x.y.z was "abolished" and x.y.z.w was introduced ?

Explanation in general:
http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/3522
(you may want to search within that page for "2.6.20.1" to jump to the meat of the explanation)

Explanation of why 2.6.8.1 and not 2.6.9 in this particular case:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/225784

-Barry K. Nathan <[email protected]>

#3 lore raw
In reply to xerces8

Hi!

Quoted 2 lines

Can someone tell me why the ages old, established versioning scheme of x.y.z was "abolished" and x.y.z.w was introduced ?

No idea, I'd prefer for that kernel to be called 2.6.9. Anyway...

When 2.6.9 comes out, will it be relative to 2.6.8 or to 2.6.8.1?

Pavel

Signature · 2 lines
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!