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

Linux 4.0

git.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–85 of 85 posts

Re: Linux 4.0

#81

Post by amyjess »

brudgers wrote: post #70
SquareWheel wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Highly improbable to be the case. Microsoft damaged XP compatibility with Vista; that they would care about software built for 95-98 in 2015 seems unlikely by comparison. It's also just a product name. Programmers will check the kernel version, not the "friendly" consumer-facing string. I realize this information has been circulated around, but unless this has been confirmed by Microsoft please don't claim facts with…

Here's some evidence to support the inference regarding the out of order naming: https://searchcode.com/?q=if%28version%2Cstartswith%28%22win...

In one of those examples:

> if (osName.indexOf("9") != -1) {

Jesus Hermann Christ. It's not just looking for "Windows 9", it's looking for a "9" anywhere in the version string. Yes, it's under an if clause looking for "Windows" also in the version string, so it won't trigger on "Plan 9" or something, but still it'll get triggered by something like Windows 19.

Re: Linux 4.0

#82

Post by [deleted] »

amyjess wrote: post #81
brudgers wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's some evidence to support the inference regarding the out of order naming: https://searchcode.com/?q=if%28version%2Cstartswith%28%22win...

In one of those examples: > if (osName.indexOf("9") != -1) { Jesus Hermann Christ. It's not just looking for "Windows 9", it's looking for a "9" anywhere in the version string. Yes, it's under an if clause looking for "Windows" also in the version string, so it won't trigger on "Plan 9" or something, but still it'll get triggered by something like Windows 19.

[deleted]

Re: Linux 4.0

#83

Post by nirvdrum »

zanny wrote: post #79
nirvdrum wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Web browsers break backwards-compatibility all the time. They use the major version number bump to justify it. I gave up trying to keep a Firefox extension I wrote up-to-date since the API changed every 6 weeks. I think it's settled down a bit since the early days, but the reason they bump the major version number is so they can break things.

I meant more in terms of they don't break the standards they implement, they just add more on, but yeah mechanically its a misnomer.

Gotcha. Outside of extension devs, it probably doesn't matter. But I figured I'd mention it.

Re: Linux 4.0

#84

Post by jazzdev »

coldpie wrote: post #67
gabeio wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fedora recently ditched naming the versions themselves the community can name if it they wish. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/201...

> Fedora recently ditched naming the versions Thank fucking God. I loathe version names. Place these in release date order: Lion, Snow Leopard, and Tiger. Now, place these in release order: 10.6, 10.7, and 10.8. Which do you find communicated more useful information?

Historically the name came first. Engineering would start working on a new version, Foo, and later on Marketing would decide it if was going to be 1.3 or 2.0

At least that's how it worked in commercial software. Now the names have taken on a life of their own.

Re: Linux 4.0

#85

Post by mixmastamyk »

tsm wrote: post #73
coldpie wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fedora recently ditched naming the versions Thank fucking God. I loathe version names. Place these in release date order: Lion, Snow Leopard, and Tiger. Now, place these in release order: 10.6, 10.7, and 10.8. Which do you find communicated more useful information?

Why not have both? I find Intrepid Ibex, Gutsy Gibbon, Feisty Fawn, Hardy Heron, etc. to be quite sortable.

Until the one after Zany Zebra.
Post reply on HN