| |||||||||||||
2.8.0?2.8.0?Posted May 25, 2011 9:58 UTC (Wed) by Janne (guest, #40891)Parent article: 2.8.0?
Since the "2" and the "6" are not going to change, why not simply drop them? Instead of having "Linux 2.6.39, 2.6.40" etc., we could simply have "Linux 39, 40, etc.".
(Log in to post comments)
2.8.0? Posted May 25, 2011 14:50 UTC (Wed) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] Having two numbers for major changes is excessive, but it would be nice to keep at least one major version number for incompatible changes (e.g. syscall cleanup). I'd rather go with 3.0, 3.1,... 3.42 etc.
|
|||||||||||||