From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754355AbaIPPRr (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Sep 2014 11:17:47 -0400 Received: from mail.tpi.com ([74.45.170.26]:37694 "EHLO mail.tpi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754022AbaIPPRd (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Sep 2014 11:17:33 -0400 Message-ID: <5418548B.9080609@canonical.com> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 09:17:31 -0600 From: Tim Gardner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: Kamal Mostafa , kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [3.13.y.z extended stable] Linux 3.13.11.7 stable review References: <1410818997-9432-1-git-send-email-kamal@canonical.com> <20140916000309.GA8853@kroah.com> <54178FEB.3000606@canonical.com> <20140916012609.GB29475@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20140916012609.GB29475@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/15/2014 07:26 PM, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 07:18:35PM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote: >> On 09/15/2014 06:03 PM, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 03:06:50PM -0700, Kamal Mostafa wrote: >>>> This is the start of the review cycle for the Linux 3.13.11.7 stable kernel. >>>> >>>> This version contains 187 new patches, summarized below. The new patches are >>>> posted as replies to this message and also available in this git branch: >>>> >>>> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/linux.git;h=linux-3.13.y-review;a=shortlog >>>> >>>> git://kernel.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/linux.git linux-3.13.y-review >>>> >>>> The review period for version 3.13.11.7 will be open for the next three days. >>>> To report a problem, please reply to the relevant follow-up patch message. >>> >>> As I asked before, please change the name to not be x.y, it is confusing >>> for lots of people. >>> >>> Use the "normal" way of naming kernel releases, pick a few character >>> naming scheme please. >>> >> >> I think what Kamal said is that he would consider your request. I, >> however, don't think it wise to change version schemes mid-stream in an >> established series. > > Even if that "established series" is the thing that is causing > complaints? > >> Can you provide hard evidence that this version scheme is confusing lots >> of people ? I'm only aware of one complaint voiced by Peter Anvin at the >> kernel summit (http://lwn.net/Articles/608917/). > > Peter's complaint is one that I know of that is in the public record. > > So is mine. > > How many others do you need? > This is a seriously silly argument over an _opinion_ of what is "confusing", and so far I am not feeling moved by the number of contrary opinions. Our version scheme makes sense from a Debian perspective in that it indicates exactly when the Canonical branch was started. It also has the advantage of being distinguishable from the kernel.org version. I _want_ the consumer to be aware of where they have acquired their kernel sources (as if the git URL is insufficient). Frankly, if the version is an _enduring_ source of confusion, then perhaps the consumer should seek other endeavors. rtg -- Tim Gardner tim.gardner@canonical.com