Torvalds Christens The Next Linux Kernel Series 3.x
It's official, kernel version 3.0 is on its way. Linus confirmed this both in an announcement and by checking in the first 3.0 release candidate. The new branch is not expected to include any major milestones in terms of features, but it may stimulate developers to adopt policies of cruft removal and modernization.
Linus had mooted the idea of skipping 2.8 (stable branches use even numbers) in favor of 3.0 a couple of weeks ago on the kernel mailing list.
On the forums, reaction to the news has been mixed, with some wondering if Linus is falling prey to the current trend of large major version number jumps to give the impression of significant progress. But, that raises the question: is it worse to have a small version number jump for a new release that breaks everything, or a large version increase that turns out not to be hugely different from the previous release. It's a point that Linus touches on in his announcement:
[...]we are very much *not* doing a KDE-4 or a Gnome-3 here. No breakage, no special scary new features, nothing at all like that. [...] So no ABI changes, no API changes, no magical new features - just steady plodding progress.
His justification for the version jump is two-fold. First, the 2.6.x branch was around for an unusually long time. 2.6 has been with us since 2003, and version 2 itself began way back in 1996. Second, it is symbolic because, as the Linux kernel is 20 years old this year, it is now entering its third decade.
So, it's not a ground-breaking release, and the message seems to be: everything's going great, prepare for more of the same.
The original announcement on the Linux Kernel Mailing List.
UK based freelance writer Michael Reed writes about technology, retro computing, geek culture and gender politics.
Trending Topics
| OpenLDAP Everywhere Reloaded, Part I | May 23, 2012 |
| Chemistry the Gromacs Way | May 21, 2012 |
| Make TV Awesome with Bluecop | May 16, 2012 |
| Hack and / - Password Cracking with GPUs, Part I: the Setup | May 15, 2012 |
| An Introduction to Application Development with Catalyst and Perl | May 14, 2012 |
| Cryptocurrency: Your Total Cost Is 01001010010 | May 09, 2012 |
- A Statistical Approach to the Spam Problem
- Validate an E-Mail Address with PHP, the Right Way
- OpenLDAP Everywhere Reloaded, Part I
- Strip DRM from WMV File
- Linux--The Internet Appliance?
- Eagles BBS
- The Linux Signals Handling Model
- Boot with GRUB
- Streaming MPEG-4 with Linux
- Chapter 16: Ubuntu and Your iPod
- Editorial Standards?
3 hours 56 min ago - Great one
5 hours 31 min ago - Common form in many
5 hours 52 min ago - Awsome
10 hours 55 min ago - Euro 2012 Coupon Codes - Get 20% Off Pavtube TiVo Converter
3 days 9 hours ago - Euro 2012 Big Sale: 20% Off Instant Savings on TiVo Converter
3 days 9 hours ago - MakeMKV works as well, though
3 days 9 hours ago - Euro 2012 Big Sale: 20% Off Instant Savings on TiVo Converter
3 days 10 hours ago - Awesome
4 days 8 hours ago - Who worries approx the
4 days 10 hours ago





Comments
Kernel upgrade. No major
Kernel upgrade. No major features. Boring.
Announcement link
The announcement links you posted were an interesting read, but I believe you meant to post this link: http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/5/29/204
Ouch
Ouch. Quite right. I winced at myself for that one.
UK based freelance writer Michael Reed writes about technology, retro computing, geek culture and gender politics.
Linux versions
Why not make a slight modification to the versioning schema? Something like this...
3.0.x for 3rd decade year 0
3.1.x for 3rd decade year 1
3.2.x for 3rd decade year 2
etc...
Of course, that might be too complicated...
coolaid ver bump, major revs
coolaid ver bump, major revs for major progress plz, minor revs for minor progress --- otherwise, set major milestones so when hit, a major rev makes sense
not wow'd here
What's next?
Ok, admit it people, what where the diffs between 2.6.18 and 2.6.19 ?
Only some geeks (or user who suffered from some bugs) remember when this version change was, and what it contained.
So, I applaud Linus to this decision, 3.0 for the third decade.
And then, for the 4th decade, after somewhere between 3.40 (3month) or 3.60 (2month) there would come version 4.0.
Nice, why not?
PS: yes this stops some questions for 2.7 code also (SCO).
Long live Linus
Rightfully said by Linus-- this is just another version with more bug fixes, drivers and etc. The kernel is matured.
Im still waiting and wondering when linux will power spaceships and future technology that still is'nt in existence.
3.x so good.
3.x so good.
Mocking SCO
Remember when SCO asked for the source code for Linux kernel 2.7?
Jumping from 2.6 to 3.0 is a bit more funny, when you keep this in mind :-)
For all of those guys saying
For all of those guys saying "no big progress", please, measure the progresses made between Linux 2.6.0 and Linux 3.0. They ARE worthy of a major release.
Why Not?
Not a big deal at all!
Mr. M$ do it all the time! Recently announced a version 8.
What a lot of people just figured out as it's nothing more than an old and well know "7 with a new skin" ;-)) What about 95, 98, ME, 2000... just to say for the desktop side. Who really believes that they have 8 SO? Ok, I do believe in Santa either.
Let's step up to "3"
i am surprised nobody
i am surprised nobody suggested to shave to 2 off and increment the 6.
That idea probably already has a copyright
Or even a patent! Need to stay away from that frightful thought. It could wind up in court!