(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-26 Thread Sérgio Basto
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 11:07 -0400, jonsmirl at gmail.com wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox > wrote: > > Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a > big > > version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all > in > > git in case someone

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-26 Thread Sérgio Basto
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 11:07 -0400, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in git in

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Boaz Harrosh
On 05/23/2011 11:52 PM, Alexey Zaytsev wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 00:33, Linus Torvalds > wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Martin Nybo Andersen
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Zimny Lech wrote: > Hi, > > 2011/5/24 Lisa Milne : >>> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >>> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >>> the fourth one. >> >> How about stardates? > > This is a wonderful idea! :)

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Tony Luck
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > So if you combine all the above: > > D. Y. N > D - Is the decade since birth (1991 not 1990) > Y - is the year in the decade so you have 3.1.x, 3.2.x, .. 3.10.x, 4.1.X and > so on > ? ?Nice incremental number. > N - The Linus release of this

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Jiri Kosina
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > Also, when someone in my lab installs here> on a box that's running software I wrote that needs to support > modern high-speed peripherals, then I can say "What? You seriously > expect this stuff to work on Linux 2007? Let's install a slightly

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Emil Langrock
On Tuesday 24 May 2011 23:05:30 Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Tuesday 2011-05-24 20:48, eschvoca wrote: > >On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever. > > > >Using the date also clearly communicates it is not about

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Lisa Milne
> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > the fourth one. How about stardates? That'd make a release made now 64860.8 I really should sleep more... -- Lisa Milne

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Hans-Peter Jansen
On Monday 23 May 2011, 22:33:48 Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 > > before cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0"

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday 2011-05-24 20:48, eschvoca wrote: >On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >> It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever. > >Using the date also clearly communicates it is not about features. On the contrary: Whenever a 2.6.x release was set

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday 2011-05-24 17:46, Ralf Baechle wrote: On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 03:43:48PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in git in case someone wishes to sneak out at

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Lisa Milne
So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be 3.0, not 3.0.0 - the stable team would get the third digit rather than the fourth one. How about stardates? That'd make a release made now 64860.8 I really should sleep more... -- Lisa Milne l...@ltmnet.com

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Ralf Baechle
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 07:17:21PM -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be 3.0, not 3.0.0 - the stable team would get the third digit rather than the fourth one. If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, then

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Ralf Baechle
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 03:43:48PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly horror back from

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Matthias Schniedermeyer
On 23.05.2011 13:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be 3.0, not 3.0.0 - the

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread david
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: On 23.05.2011 13:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Emil Langrock
Linus Torvalds wrote: PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to do things, I listen. Correct :) I would

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Zimny Lech
Hi, 2011/5/24 Lisa Milne l...@ltmnet.com: So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be 3.0, not 3.0.0 - the stable team would get the third digit rather than the fourth one. How about stardates? This is a wonderful idea! :) That'd make a release made now 64860.8 I really

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday 2011-05-24 20:48, eschvoca wrote: On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever. Using the date also clearly communicates it is not about features. On the contrary: Whenever a 2.6.x release was set out the

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Hans-Peter Jansen
On Monday 23 May 2011, 22:33:48 Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be 3.0, not 3.0.0

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Jiri Kosina
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Andy Lutomirski wrote: Also, when someone in my lab installs insert ancient enterprise distro here on a box that's running software I wrote that needs to support modern high-speed peripherals, then I can say What? You seriously expect this stuff to work on Linux 2007?

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-25 Thread Emil Langrock
On Tuesday 24 May 2011 23:05:30 Jan Engelhardt wrote: On Tuesday 2011-05-24 20:48, eschvoca wrote: On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever. Using the date also clearly communicates it is not about features.

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Zimny Lech
Hi, 2011/5/24 Lisa Milne : >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", >> not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than >> the fourth one. > > How about stardates? This is a wonderful idea! :) > That'd make a release made now 64860.8 > > I really

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
On Tue, 24 May 2011 14:30:59 +0200, Jacek Luczak said: > 2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt : > > On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > >>Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of > >>2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also > >>numbers"

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Emil Langrock
Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > the voices tell me to do things, I listen. Correct :) I

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Matthias Schniedermeyer
On 23.05.2011 13:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday 2011-05-24 17:46, Ralf Baechle wrote: >On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 03:43:48PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > >> Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big >> version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in >> git in case someone wishes to sneak

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On 05/23/2011 04:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Ralf Baechle
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 03:43:48PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big > version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in > git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly > horror back

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Ralf Baechle
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 07:17:21PM -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > > not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than > > the fourth one. > > If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else,

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Alan Cox
Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly horror back from the dead. Alan

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Alan Cox
> If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, > then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be > incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different > from what we have now. I think I prefer 3 digits. Otherwise we will have to

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Jacek Luczak
2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt : > On Tuesday 2011-05-24 14:30, Jacek Luczak wrote: > >>2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt : >>> On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: >>> Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday 2011-05-24 14:30, Jacek Luczak wrote: >2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt : >> On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >>>Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of >>>2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also >>>numbers" transition

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread eschvoca
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:36 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> >> I think this whole discussion misses the essence of the new development >> model, which is that we no longer do these kinds of feature-based major >> milestones. > > Indeed. > >

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Jacek Luczak
2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt : > On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >>Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of >>2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also >>numbers" transition much more natural. >> >>Because of our historical

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: >Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of >2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also >numbers" transition much more natural. > >Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x -

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread da...@lang.hm
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: > On 23.05.2011 13:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread jonsm...@gmail.com
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox wrote: > Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big > version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in > git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly > horror back from the

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:36 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > I think this whole discussion misses the essence of the new development > model, which is that we no longer do these kinds of feature-based major > milestones. Indeed. It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever.

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 05/24/2011 08:07 AM, jonsmirl at gmail.com wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox > wrote: >> Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big >> version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in >> git in case someone wishes to sneak

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Tuesday 24 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of > 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also > numbers" transition much more natural. > > Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - >

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0" - the stable team

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Linus Torvalds wrote: > Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of > 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also > numbers" transition much more natural. Yeah, it sounds really good to get rid of the (meanwhile) meaningless "2.6." prefix from our

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Alexey Zaytsev
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 00:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not "3.0.0"

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 12:22 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:13:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > > this PS is going to result in

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Oliver Pinter
On 5/23/11, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) I think, the best time for this, after reorganize the ARM arch folder / tree. > > So I'm toying with

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Tuesday 24 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the odd numbers are also numbers transition much more natural. Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - there's

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to do things, I listen.

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 12:22 -0700, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:13:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going to result in more

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Alexey Zaytsev
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 00:33, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:21:26PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: They tell him to avoid the question to which 42 is the answer. What 2.6 Linux kernel version was the last before 3.0? -- Steve ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Oliver Pinter
On 5/23/11, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) I think, the best time for this, after reorganize the ARM arch

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Ted Ts'o
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 03:21:21PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the odd numbers are also numbers transition much more natural. Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - there's

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Jacek Luczak
2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt jeng...@medozas.de: On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the odd numbers are also numbers transition much more natural. Because of our historical

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday 2011-05-24 14:30, Jacek Luczak wrote: 2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt jeng...@medozas.de: On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the odd numbers are also numbers transition

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Jacek Luczak
2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt jeng...@medozas.de: On Tuesday 2011-05-24 14:30, Jacek Luczak wrote: 2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt jeng...@medozas.de: On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Alan Cox
If we change from 2.6.X to 3.X, then if we don't change anything else, then successive stable release will cause the LINUX_VERSION_CODE to be incremented. This isn't necessary bad, but it would be a different from what we have now. I think I prefer 3 digits. Otherwise we will have to pass

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Alan Cox
Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly horror back from the dead. Alan ___

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread jonsm...@gmail.com
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in git in case someone wishes to sneak out at midnight and bring some crawly

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 05/24/2011 08:07 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: Can we drop most of MCA, EISA and ISA bus if we are going to have a big version change ? A driver spring clean is much overdue and it's all in git in case someone wishes

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:36 AM, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote: I think this whole discussion misses the essence of the new development model, which is that we no longer do these kinds of feature-based major milestones. Indeed. It's not about features. It hasn't been about features

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On 05/23/2011 04:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnarmi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be 3.0, not 3.0.0 - the

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-24 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Tue, 24 May 2011 14:30:59 +0200, Jacek Luczak said: 2011/5/24 Jan Engelhardt jeng...@medozas.de: On Tuesday 2011-05-24 01:33, Linus Torvalds wrote: Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the odd numbers are also numbers

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > the voices tell me to do things, I

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. > I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going > to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to do > things, I listen. I really

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Phil Turmel
Hi Linus, On 05/23/2011 04:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Ted Ts'o
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0",

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread jonsm...@gmail.com
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >> cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", > not

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 03:21:21PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > > > So

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:21:26PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > They tell him to avoid the question to which 42 is the answer. What 2.6 Linux kernel version was the last before 3.0? -- Steve

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Linus Torvalds
Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the "odd numbers are also numbers" transition much more natural. Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 05/23/2011 04:17 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before >>> cutting 3.0.0! :-) >> >> So I'm toying with 3.0

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Mon, 23 May 2011 19:17:21 -0400 Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > > >

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Greg KH
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > > cutting 3.0.0! :-) > > So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0",

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before > cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be "3.0", not "3.0.0" - the stable team would get the third digit rather than the

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Mon, 23 May 2011 21:25:25 +0200 (CEST) Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > > this PS is going to result in more

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Greg KH
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:13:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting > too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that > this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when > the voices tell me

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Linus Torvalds
So I've been busily merging stuff, and just wanted to send out a quick reminder that I warned people in the 39 announcement that this might be a slightly shorter merge window than usual, so that I can avoid having to make the -rc1 release from Japan using my slow laptop (doing "allyesconfig"

(Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Linus Torvalds
So I've been busily merging stuff, and just wanted to send out a quick reminder that I warned people in the 39 announcement that this might be a slightly shorter merge window than usual, so that I can avoid having to make the -rc1 release from Japan using my slow laptop (doing allyesconfig builds

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Greg KH
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:13:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Mon, 23 May 2011 21:25:25 +0200 (CEST) Thomas Gleixner wrote: On Mon, 23 May 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going to result in more

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be 3.0, not 3.0.0 - the stable team would get the third digit rather than

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: PS. The voices in my head also tell me that the numbers are getting too big. I may just call the thing 2.8.0. And I almost guarantee that this PS is going to result in more discussion than the rest, but when the voices tell me to do

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Greg KH
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread jonsm...@gmail.com
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Mon, 23 May 2011 19:17:21 -0400 Ted Ts'o wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 01:33:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Linus Torvalds
Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the odd numbers are also numbers transition much more natural. Because of our historical even/odd model, I wouldn't do a 2.7.x - there's just too much history of 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 being

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Phil Turmel
Hi Linus, On 05/23/2011 04:33 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be 3.0, not

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: Another advantage of switching numbering models (ie 3.0 instead of 2.8.x) would be that it would also make the odd numbers are also numbers transition much more natural. Yeah, it sounds really good to get rid of the (meanwhile)

Re: (Short?) merge window reminder

2011-05-23 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: I really hope there's also a voice that tells you to wait until .42 before cutting 3.0.0! :-) So I'm toying with 3.0 (and in that case, it really would be 3.0, not