Talk:Q14579

developer (P178)

Hello, is there any rule about the number of developper that one should mention with that property. Initialy, there was only Linus Torvalds (Q34253). I added Alan Cox (Q55123) and Greg Kroah-Hartman (Q93084). The list could be very long. So, before adding others, I prefer to be sure about any rule. Pamputt (talk) 20:57, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Removing versions

@MazinX, Moretti, Imbericle, Well-Informed Optimist: Hi! You all made changes to software version identifier (P348) in past and I would like to inform you that (1) we wan't to keep older values of software version identifier (P348) to reconstruct the development history of the linux kernel. (2) removing statements with sources should only be done if they are wrong. (3) changing statements to a value that is not stated in the source is also wrong. At this point it is probably to difficult to roll back on all those changes, but I would be glad if you could add future versions in a correct manner. I will try to retrieve some of the old information from the edit history. -Tobias1984 (talk) 07:56, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@Dimon4ezzz: see above, I reverted your removals. —DSGalaktos (talk) 16:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Code names

Is there a good property to record the code name (“Linux for Workgroups”, “Hurr durr I'ma sheep”, etc.) on each software version identifier (P348) statement? —DSGalaktos (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@DSGalaktos: If we are consistent with the Wikidata:Wikiproject Book model, it would be better to create an item for each version and use a name property. This makes easier to use a specific version of the kernel in a statement. Maybe the has edition or translation (P747) property would fit. TomT0m ^(talk) 18:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@TomT0m: I’m not sure if that’s worth the trouble… I don’t think there’s a lot of statements specific to a certain software version, much less than for a book edition at least. —DSGalaktos (talk) 18:58, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@DSGalaktos: It's nothing to create them with a script :) And they can serve for example in distibution edition description, for example. TomT0m ^(talk) 19:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Removal of the protocol main value

The property scope constraint for "protocol" states that

"The property protocol should not be used in this location (as main value). The only valid location for this property is as qualifiers."

Also to me it does not make much sense to try to list protocols supported by the Linux kernel in this place.

Are there any objections to removing the protocol value altogether?

Trilemma2 (talk) 14:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Is there a way to automate this?

Stable is now 6.6.11 but I'm having difficulty making the edit on mobile which prompts me to ask: is there a way to automate updating the version numbers? Thanks. Talib1101 (talk) 03:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC)