No. But the even/odd thing is still so fresh in peoples memory (despite us
not having used it for years), and I think some projects aped us on it, so
if I didn't change the numbering setup, but just wanted to reset the minor
number, I'd probably jump from 2.6 to 2.8 just for historical reasons.
But I could also see the second number as being the "year", and 2008 would
get 2.8, and then next year I'd make the first release of 2009 be 2.9.1
(and probably avoid the ".0" just because it again has the connotations of
a "big new untested release", which is not true in a date-based numbering
scheme). And then 2010 would be 3.0.1 etc..
Anyway, I have to say that I personally don't have any hugely strong
opinions on the numbering. I suspect others do, though, and I'm almost
certain that this is an absolutely _perfect_ "bikeshed-painting" subject
where thousands of people will be very passionate and send me their
opinions on why _their_ particular shed color is so much better.
The only thing I do know is that I agree that "big meaningless numbers"
are bad. "26" is already pretty big. As you point out, the 2.4.x series
has much bigger numbers yet.
And yes, something like "2008" is obviously numerically bigger, but has a
direct meaning and as such is possibly better than something arbitrary and
non-descriptive like "26".
Let the bike-shed-painting begin.
(I had planned on taking this up at the kernel summit, where the shed
painting is at least limited to a much smaller audience, but since you
asked..)
Linus
--
