Posted May 24, 2011 6:16 UTC (Tue) by corsac (subscriber, #49696)
In reply to: Date based by xxiao
Parent article: 2.8.0?
> half-year based release seems predictable for other projects and a reasonable duration(close to the average gap between 2.6.x releases).
It's more like ~70 days, which is just above two months. Where do you pick that half a year from?
> maybe it's time for Linus to stick to the 6-month release cycle now? this may bring efficiency for related projects as well, also you can have the long-term kernel every few years, this is how ubuntu works these days and it's quite good in practice I think.
Well, ubuntu is fairly new in this game, but Gentoo was already using that release scheme (when they were still releasing). And that releasing scheme is not really a good indicator in case of a kernel. 2.6.32 has been released dec 3rd 2009 so it would have been called 2009.12 (or even 2009.9 if we count the merge window close) but latest release of that kernel was yesterday so it's not really a good indication of the level of support.
You can't say you have a two-years old kernel, you *must* upgrade, it's just wrong. All in all, I don't even think it's worth discussing that scheme, sorry for losing your time...