From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757563Ab0BLUZh (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:25:37 -0500 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:45811 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751382Ab0BLUZg (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:25:36 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:25:34 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Jean Delvare , lasse.collin@tukaani.org, mirrors@kernel.org, linux-kernel , "FTPAdmin Kernel.org" , users@kernel.org Subject: Re: [kernel.org users] XZ Migration discussion Message-ID: <20100212202534.GH11239@parisc-linux.org> References: <4B744E13.8040004@kernel.org> <20100212150137.648dca7c@hyperion.delvare> <4B75A5FE.8020408@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B75A5FE.8020408@zytor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:03:26AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > 3* Create a new subdirectory for every 2.6.x kernel, and move all the > > related files there. This would shrink the main index drastically, and > > each subdirectory would have a reasonable size (except maybe 2.6.16 and > > 2.6.27.) Oddly enough this has been done for the files under testing/ > > already, so I am curious why we don't do it for the release files (and > > the testing/incr/ files, while we're at it.) > > Well, part of the reason why is that we're functionally "stuck" on 2.6; > a prefix which really has lost all meaning. > > It might open up the question if we shouldn't just do a Solaris and drop > the leading 2 (so the next kernel would be 6.33) or call the kernel > after that 3.0 instead of 2.6.34, and then 3.1 instead of 2.6.35. Damn, we forgot to have that fight at Kernel Summit last year. I'm in favour of the 3.0 / 3.1 / 3.2 with stable@ being responsible for 3.0.1, 3.0.2, 3.1.1, etc. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."