Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linux 3.0-rc1 is here

git.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 80 posts

Re: Linux 3.0-rc1 is here

#31

Post by kia »

riobard wrote: post #7

For those wondering what's new: “So what are the big changes? NOTHING. Absolutely nothing. Sure, we have the usual two thirds driver changes, and a lot of random fixes, but the point is that 3.0 is just about renumbering, 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. We've been doing time-based releases for many years now, this is in no way…

It would break many of the programs which rely on 2.6.x naming scheme. Linus always was on the side of not breaking things if they do work. It seems that he changed his views for this particular case.

Re: Linux 3.0-rc1 is here

#34

Post by BasDirks »

riobard wrote: post #15
hasenj wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't know you were quoting Linus, you should make it more obvious.

added the name :)

That's a start, but people only read that name after they've read the quote. Helpful conventions for quotes are:

"quotes" - Linus Torvalds

quotes - Linus Torvalds

Re: Linux 3.0-rc1 is here

#35

Post by hasenj »

hasenj wrote: post #11
riobard wrote: post #7

For those wondering what's new: “So what are the big changes? NOTHING. Absolutely nothing. Sure, we have the usual two thirds driver changes, and a lot of random fixes, but the point is that 3.0 is just about renumbering, 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. We've been doing time-based releases for many years now, this is in no way…

I didn't know you were quoting Linus, you should make it more obvious.

It's funny and upsetting how I get more upvotes for comments like these than for things I actually put some thought into.

Re: Linux 3.0-rc1 is here

#36

Post by j2d2j2d2 »

cookiecaper wrote: post #27
j2d2j2d2 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shouldn't. Open source version numbers greater than 1.0 dont mean a whole lot. Chrome, the browser, around version 8 (give or take). How much sense does that make?

Chrome is on version #11 in stable. #12 and #13 are in beta and dev respectively.

thanks!

Re: Linux 3.0-rc1 is here

#37

Post by haruka »

Seems a bit strange to me. A major version increment is supposed to announce "this is significantly different and possibly incompatible".

But now it doesn't mean that. It means 20 years.

There are extremely good reasons not to increment the major version. For instance tools which take the conservative approach of checking for 2.6 will all be broken. Those tools correctly elected not to risk wrong behavior resulting from a major version change.

When you add together the time it takes to compensate for this change for all maintainers everywhere (tools developers, distro developers, everyone), surely it will run into the hundreds of hours, perhaps thousands. All for, functionally, nothing. And sorry for calling you Shirley.

Seems to be an objectively bad move. Oh well. This needless-on-purpose change will cause resentment, but after time it will dissipate.

Re: Linux 3.0-rc1 is here

#38

Post by augustl »

marchdown wrote: post #19
aclark wrote: post #14

I know they invented git, but that website sure is fugly. Time to switch to github, perhaps :-).

There is a nice open-source (which github is not) web front-end for git repos, http://www.gitalist.com/ , and would you believe it, even they use git-web on their website.

Unfortunately, http://example.gitalist.com/ doesn't load any content whatsoever in my browser (Google Chrome with JavaScript disabled/whitelisted). Just a white page. And I have a hunch browsing with JavaScript off is more common for kernel devs than, say, GitHub users.

Re: Linux 3.0-rc1 is here

#39

Post by taken11 »

haruka wrote: post #37

Seems a bit strange to me. A major version increment is supposed to announce "this is significantly different and possibly incompatible". But now it doesn't mean that. It means 20 years. There are extremely good reasons not to increment the major version. For instance tools which take the conservative approach of checking for 2.6 will all be broken. Those tools correctly elected not to risk wrong behavior resulting f…

checking for 2.6 no longer means much, 2.6.0 and a current 2.6.39 have so many changes that just checking for 2.6 is not enough anymore. that was one of the reasons for the new version.

Re: Linux 3.0-rc1 is here

#40

Post by perlgeek »

jordan0day wrote: post #18

One the one hand, the "benevolent dictator" model has shown itself to work pretty well for Linux, compared to some major failings of the "committee" model on other projects. On the other hand, does anyone think the fact that "major" changes can be done by one person who is "just going all alpha-male" will potentially spook people? I mean, I doubt too many people here on hn have a problem with Linus' personality. I im…

I don't think the 3.0 release is "just going all alpha-male" - I think it reflects the maturity of the linux kernel, and could have done some years ago with good conscience too.

That said, his Google Tech Talk on git, which turned into a rant against SVN/CVS users did lower my respect for his personal skills.

Post reply on HN