[opensuse-project] Versionitis - Results (Or: The next openSUSE release is openSUSE 12.1)
The voting on how to do the versioning is over and the "old school" has won by 55 per cent (of 98 participants). Thanks to all that participated in the two votes and the discussion around the topic. As Coolo said in http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-project/2011-03/msg00516.html, we'd like to make a small change to the numbering: We will not have a .0 release but only .1, .2, .3 release. Since we have releases in three months, the November release is always the .1 release, the July release the .2 and the March release the .3. So, the plan is that the next release will be called openSUSE 12.1 and launched on the 10th of November, 2011! Two years later - on the 14th of November, 2013 - we will then have the openSUSE 13.1 release. So, the next four releases are: * November 2011: openSUSE 12.1 * July 2012: openSUSE 12.2 * March 2013: openSUSE 12.3 * November 2013: openSUSE 13.1 Detailed results for logged-in openSUSE members are available at the connect poll page and I have reproduced them here as well: * A: "old school": Like currently but only counting the right number until 3: 55% (54 votes) * B: "Fedora style": Just integers: 29 % (28 votes) * C: "Ubuntu style": YY.MM: 16 % (16 votes) This is also consistent with the results of thefirst public voting (see http://lizards.opensuse.org/2011/03/28/opensuse-release-versioning-poll-on- last-three-options/ ). Note that openSUSE does not have a major and minor numbering, even if it seems so. There is right now no difference in any way between what we would do for openSUSE 11.4 or 12.0 or 12.1 – and no sense to speak about openSUSE 11 or openSUSE 11 family. We also had in the past no process on how to name the next release (when to increase which parts of the number). I think this new versioning is still consistent with the old one but also an improvement since it's now clear that we change the first digit every two year. The first poll showed that half of our users prefer a date based versioning and the other a consecutive numbering. So, depending on your point of view, you can see this as a mixture of both or as consecutive numbering ;) So, time now to make openSUSE 12.1 a great release! Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On 06/04/11 09:06, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
The voting on how to do the versioning is over and the "old school" has won by 55 per cent (of 98 participants). Thanks to all that participated in the two votes and the discussion around the topic.
As Coolo said in http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-project/2011-03/msg00516.html, we'd like to make a small change to the numbering:
We will not have a .0 release but only .1, .2, .3 release. Since we have releases in three months, the November release is always the .1 release, the July release the .2 and the March release the .3.
So, the plan is that the next release will be called openSUSE 12.1 and launched on the 10th of November, 2011! Two years later - on the 14th of November, 2013 - we will then have the openSUSE 13.1 release.
So, the next four releases are: * November 2011: openSUSE 12.1 * July 2012: openSUSE 12.2 * March 2013: openSUSE 12.3 * November 2013: openSUSE 13.1
Just a bit of feedback: I explained this versioning scheme to some people currently not connected to openSUSE in any way (actually, these people are my colleagues at work). All of them - and I am not exaggerating here - came back and said it looks like a silly versioning scheme, it is not intuitive and obviously quite confusing. I thought I should perhaps pass this feedback on because they were very clear in their message... I know, I know, there was a poll and there is an outcome, but we should nevertheless at least listen to external feedback.
[...] Note that openSUSE does not have a major and minor numbering, even if it seems so.
Well, then I think we should have changed the versioning scheme. The fact that you had to write the sentence cited above already highlights that there is a problem. A version number XX.Y implicitly implies a major/minor scheme. Why is that? Because millions of software projects use such a major/minor versioning scheme. It's like saying a red light means you have to stop at a traffic light unless you are in openSUSE town where the rules are different and a red light actually means you are allowed to move on. Do you really think that isn't confusing? To be honest, I think it is. The old scheme didn't make much sense, and the new scheme doesn't make sense either. I do of course not want to re-open the whole discussion, the outcome of the poll has to be accepted although I think the number of participants is rather low - it seems as if even the majority of openSUSE members didn't participate. Now somebody suggested on this list to ship 12.1.1 and 12.1.2 updates in the future. This clearly implies a major/minor versioning scheme for openSUSE, I'm afraid. I think some people really have to make up their mind and/or the whole issue should be reconsidered - it should at least be consistent within openSUSE. We either follow a major/minor scheme and have a corresponding version string, or not. But a mixture of both ideas is really bad. Regards, Th. PS. Sorry, I was away, otherwise I would have sent the initial feedback earlier. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Le 12/04/2011 20:24, Thomas Hertweck a écrit :
Well, then I think we should have changed the versioning scheme.
I agree with you and I'm not sure the poll system was fair(1), but it's not a major problem and anyway we can't go again and again on it. So better explain that there is nothing to explain, use it and enjoy... jdd 1) the board did as well as he could, we can't build political coalitions on such a minor subject :-)! -- http://www.dodin.net http://pizzanetti.fr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Thomas Hertweck wrote:
[...] Note that openSUSE does not have a major and minor numbering, even if it seems so.
Well, then I think we should have changed the versioning scheme. The fact that you had to write the sentence cited above already highlights that there is a problem. A version number XX.Y implicitly implies a major/minor scheme.
Decision by committee. :-( -- Per Jessen, Zürich (8.4°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday, April 12, 2011 11:24:18 AM Thomas Hertweck wrote:
On 06/04/11 09:06, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
The voting on how to do the versioning is over and the "old school" has won by 55 per cent (of 98 participants). Thanks to all that participated in the two votes and the discussion around the topic.
As Coolo said in http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-project/2011-03/msg00516.html, we'd
like to make a small change to the numbering: We will not have a .0 release but only .1, .2, .3 release. Since we have releases in three months, the November release is always the .1 release, the July release the .2 and the March release the .3.
So, the plan is that the next release will be called openSUSE 12.1 and launched on the 10th of November, 2011! Two years later - on the 14th of November, 2013 - we will then have the openSUSE 13.1 release.
So, the next four releases are: * November 2011: openSUSE 12.1 * July 2012: openSUSE 12.2 * March 2013: openSUSE 12.3 * November 2013: openSUSE 13.1
Just a bit of feedback: I explained this versioning scheme to some people currently not connected to openSUSE in any way (actually, these people are my colleagues at work). All of them - and I am not exaggerating here - came back and said it looks like a silly versioning scheme, it is not intuitive and obviously quite confusing. I thought I should perhaps pass this feedback on because they were very clear in their message...
I know, I know, there was a poll and there is an outcome, but we should nevertheless at least listen to external feedback.
[...] Note that openSUSE does not have a major and minor numbering, even if it seems so.
Well, then I think we should have changed the versioning scheme. The fact that you had to write the sentence cited above already highlights that there is a problem. A version number XX.Y implicitly implies a major/minor scheme. Why is that? Because millions of software projects use such a major/minor versioning scheme. It's like saying a red light means you have to stop at a traffic light unless you are in openSUSE town where the rules are different and a red light actually means you are allowed to move on. Do you really think that isn't confusing? To be honest, I think it is. The old scheme didn't make much sense, and the new scheme doesn't make sense either. I do of course not want to re-open the whole discussion, the outcome of the poll has to be accepted although I think the number of participants is rather low - it seems as if even the majority of openSUSE members didn't participate.
Now somebody suggested on this list to ship 12.1.1 and 12.1.2 updates in the future. This clearly implies a major/minor versioning scheme for openSUSE, I'm afraid. I think some people really have to make up their mind and/or the whole issue should be reconsidered - it should at least be consistent within openSUSE. We either follow a major/minor scheme and have a corresponding version string, or not. But a mixture of both ideas is really bad.
Regards, Th.
PS. Sorry, I was away, otherwise I would have sent the initial feedback earlier.
Thomas, I think I (mostly) agree with your colleagues about the NEW version numbering. I don't know how such a silly versioning could have passed with the majority vote. Now that it has been decided we must realise that it may be VERY hard to get people to move from this to something better. I have proposed a model for version numbering that would make the openSUSE numbering much more meaningful( this would look like 12.0, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, etc.). If there is NO way to move from the voted upon numbering system than I think we should at least use it with my model (that is where the 12.1.1, 12.1.2 numbering comes from)... I know you said this would be bad and maybe you are right but then I think that the only other model that works is the one I proposed originally. I hope that the community can look at not only the value in the meaning of the numbering expressed in my proposal but also see the user level benafits to releaseing our project in this way. I would like to know how you feel about the numbering and release model I proposed. Also what you think your colleagues would think of the number we would use with it?.. that is if you feel comfortable making that prediction. -- Drew Adams Skype: Druonysus Mobile: 1.714.788.4038 www.facebook.com/Druonysus en.opensuse.org/User:Druonysus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On 12/04/11 23:20, Drew Adams wrote:
[...] I have proposed a model for version numbering that would make the openSUSE numbering much more meaningful( this would look like 12.0, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, etc.). If there is NO way to move from the voted upon numbering system than I think we should at least use it with my model (that is where the 12.1.1, 12.1.2 numbering comes from)... I know you said this would be bad and maybe you are right but then I think that the only other model that works is the one I proposed originally. [...]
I would like to know how you feel about the numbering and release model I proposed. Also what you think your colleagues would think of the number we would use with it?.. that is if you feel comfortable making that prediction.
I appreciate your input. We will probably never find a solution that works for everybody. I guess for the time being we just have to accept the results of the poll and live with it to fight another day... ;-) I can't give you my colleagues' opinions on your proposal right now, I can only provide my personal opinion: Any scheme that follows the XX.YY convention implies a major/minor versioning. That's perhaps not necessarily how it is meant to be (certainly not the current openSUSE versioning scheme), but that is what the majority of people will assume because it is a logical assumption based on the experience with many other software projects. It's the intuitive interpretation of seeing a version XX.YY or XX.YY.ZZ. A logical consequence of what I have just said is the following: If we treat all officially released openSUSE distributions as equal in terms of importance, quality etc, then we should use a version string that reflects such a situation, i.e. the version string should only have a single identifier (I have seen various proposals, from year/month based schemes to theme-based names to Roman numbers to plain Arabic numbers, and so on). There's one rule in software development that can be found in many books on software project management. In a nutshell, the rule states that software should be simple and intuitive. Unfortunately, I think we violate this rule with the old and the new versioning scheme. If I understand your proposal correctly, you would like to follow the Fedora way and call the major versions 12 (13, 14, ...) etc (or 12.0, 13.0, 14.0, ..., respectively). Updates (that means the original version plus the patches that have been shipped up to that point) would be released as .1, .2, .3 and so on in regular intervals. Correct? I think from a theoretical point of view this would work fine because the approach clearly follows the major/minor scheme. The first number is the major version number, the second number reflects the minor release (the update level, so to speak). However, I don't know a) how feasible it is in terms of available resources and required effort, and b) how useful the approach is in general (i.e. the cost/benefit ratio). In principle, all that users save in this way is some download volume for the first "online update" after an initial install, right? Unfortunately, I don't know how difficult it is to create the ISOs etc but I guess that your proposal might fall a bit short when it comes to the cost(effort)/benefit ratio. Kind regards, Thomas -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, 2011-04-06 at 10:06 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
The voting on how to do the versioning is over and the "old school" has won by 55 per cent (of 98 participants). Thanks to all that participated in the two votes and the discussion around the topic.
That's a small percent. Allow me to bring out a different point, on the vote method itself: there was no posibility to vote with a "blank vote". Me, I could not vote due to this. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk22NrsACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XG7QCggqEfc0pabLS0iffrXuhdIC0z 1YoAoI1tWmeey7J8i8KqnbEaUiCh2o8v =iC4d -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday, 2011-04-06 at 10:06 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
The voting on how to do the versioning is over and the "old school" has won by 55 per cent (of 98 participants). Thanks to all that participated in the two votes and the discussion around the topic.
That's a small percent.
Allow me to bring out a different point, on the vote method itself: there was no posibility to vote with a "blank vote". Me, I could not vote due to this.
It seems to be to be a little too late to bring this up? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (11.4°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On 26/04/11 16:24, Per Jessen wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday, 2011-04-06 at 10:06 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
The voting on how to do the versioning is over and the "old school" has won by 55 per cent (of 98 participants). Thanks to all that participated in the two votes and the discussion around the topic. That's a small percent.
Allow me to bring out a different point, on the vote method itself: there was no posibility to vote with a "blank vote". Me, I could not vote due to this. It seems to be to be a little too late to bring this up?
Any comment about anything in anything to do with a Linux distro is always too late..... :-( . BC -- "My sister's expecting a baby, and I don't know if I am going to be an uncle or an aunt." Chuck Nevitt -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-04-26 08:24, Per Jessen wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
It seems to be to be a little too late to bring this up?
Not for the next vote. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk22tnEACgkQtTMYHG2NR9U6sgCfe9s2R9KP1Hk+TVyXiFnmZ1NJ /U8AnjrEF6SlyWJj12Nr/ITX5A4aDDJE =lbhn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 14:11 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not for the next vote.
Consitency in a project should also mean we do not vote for the same thing every 6 months... I'd hope we DO have better things to do than discussion version numbers over and over? Last it was not clear when we step the int part.. now we know it... As such: let's make it a rocking product in the remaining time and put our efforts there... If it's rock solid and wohoo yay out of the box (figure of speak), the version number does not really matter... Neither does the difference between two really matter if one version is as bad as you can think of. It will stick to the distro for ever (almost...) Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On 26/04/11 23:24, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 14:11 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not for the next vote.
Consitency in a project should also mean we do not vote for the same thing every 6 months...
I'd hope we DO have better things to do than discussion version numbers over and over? Last it was not clear when we step the int part.. now we know it...
As such: let's make it a rocking product in the remaining time and put our efforts there... If it's rock solid and wohoo yay out of the box (figure of speak), the version number does not really matter... Neither does the difference between two really matter if one version is as bad as you can think of. It will stick to the distro for ever (almost...)
Very well expressed, Sir!: " Neither does the difference between two really matter if one version is as bad as you can think of. It will stick to the distro for ever (almost...)" As Shakespeare wrote, "A rose by any other name......." BC -- "My sister's expecting a baby, and I don't know if I am going to be an uncle or an aunt." Chuck Nevitt -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Am 26.04.2011 15:24, schrieb Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger:
As such: let's make it a rocking product in the remaining time and put our efforts there... If it's rock solid and wohoo yay out of the box (figure of speak), the version number does not really matter... Neither does the difference between two really matter if one version is as bad as you can think of. It will stick to the distro for ever (almost...)
+1 Why talking about version numbers? The come and go, and nobody will say, this product is crapp because I don´t like the version number 12.1 I wanna 12.0. (if so, this person can´t taken really serious and should leave the discussion, mailinglist, forum or whatever.) So as Dominique said before, let us make 12.1 to a release, which makes the people said: Never change a running system. Never leave openSUSE 12.1 for another distro! have fun! -- Kim Leyendecker (kimleyendecker@hotmail.de) openSUSE Ambassador / openSUSE Wiki Team DE HAVE A LOT OF FUN! http://www.opensuse.org | http://www.suse.de Have you tried SUSE Studio? Need to create a Live CD, an app you want to package and distribute , or create your own linux distro. Give SUSE Studio a try. www.susestudio.com. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-04-26 15:24, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 14:11 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not for the next vote.
Consitency in a project should also mean we do not vote for the same thing every 6 months...
I'm not discussing about voting again on the version scheme. That's done, for good or bad. What I'm saying is that the next vote on whatever thing, should have the correct options, including the blank vote. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk22zq0ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9V0dACgiERlhg+Y5KEssRV2F5bVro5J 1s0An1VQ1jSqSEjpVNVQZ/OXd/Ub28wt =89nd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 15:54 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2011-04-26 15:24, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 14:11 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not for the next vote.
Consitency in a project should also mean we do not vote for the same thing every 6 months...
I'm not discussing about voting again on the version scheme. That's done, for good or bad.
What I'm saying is that the next vote on whatever thing, should have the correct options, including the blank vote.
In this case I apologize for misinterpreting your words. For future votes on future topics, blank votes could indeed be considered to express 'I do take part, but do not support any of the options' Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 15:54:53 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2011-04-26 15:24, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 14:11 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not for the next vote.
Consitency in a project should also mean we do not vote for the same thing every 6 months...
I'm not discussing about voting again on the version scheme. That's done, for good or bad.
What I'm saying is that the next vote on whatever thing, should have the correct options, including the blank vote.
Carlos, I'll try to remember for the next vote that *I* do. Nevertheless, I do expect that a next vote will somehow get announced here, so please speak up again then and remind the person doing the next vote about this... Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-04-26 16:44, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 15:54:53 Carlos E. R. wrote:
Carlos, I'll try to remember for the next vote that *I* do. Nevertheless, I do expect that a next vote will somehow get announced here, so please speak up again then and remind the person doing the next vote about this...
Right :-) But when I knew that there was no "blank" option, it was to late. I think I did mention it here at the time. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk224DMACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XDEwCghjZL0Aw9n4NV105Ru2Y0agtP lRIAnRgu+CWgUfUrgzdD+PoyZGRPnPNb =+Ynl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Op 26-04-11 17:09, Carlos E. R. schreef:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 2011-04-26 16:44, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 15:54:53 Carlos E. R. wrote: Carlos, I'll try to remember for the next vote that *I* do. Nevertheless, I do expect that a next vote will somehow get announced here, so please speak up again then and remind the person doing the next vote about this... Right :-)
But when I knew that there was no "blank" option, it was to late. I think I did mention it here at the time.
- -- Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk224DMACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XDEwCghjZL0Aw9n4NV105Ru2Y0agtP lRIAnRgu+CWgUfUrgzdD+PoyZGRPnPNb =+Ynl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Yes, my problem 4 not voting is also that only the first vote was announced... Not knowing when or where 2 vote leads 2 no votes at all....
-- Enjoy your time around, Oddball (M9.) (Now or never...) OS: Linux 2.6.37.1-1.2-desktop x86_64 Huidige gebruiker: oddball@AMD64x2sfn1 Systeem: openSUSE 11.4 (x86_64) KDE: 4.6.00 (4.6.0) "release 6" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 19:06:08 Oddball wrote:
[...] Yes, my problem 4 not voting is also that only the first vote was announced... Not knowing when or where 2 vote leads 2 no votes at all....
Both votes were announced in the same manner - on this mailing list and my blog, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-04-27 13:11, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 19:06:08 Oddball wrote:
[...]
Both votes were announced in the same manner - on this mailing list and my blog,
Perhaps when a vote is requested of the membership we should all receive a brief email. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk24OIYACgkQtTMYHG2NR9WujgCgl2qfHjmVa175mpLA85OsEU6x 9D0An3yERBs/XpKMhQHFyehquddAEAXB =Kp9p -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 05:06 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
The voting on how to do the versioning is over and the "old school" has won by 55 per cent (of 98 participants). Thanks to all that participated in the two votes and the discussion around the topic. That's a small percent. Allow me to bring out a different point, on the vote method itself: there was no posibility to vote with a "blank vote". Me, I could not vote due to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, 2011-04-06 at 10:06 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote: this.
Not that it matters - but +1; I didn't vote because I don't care. I think this issue is heat, not light [or "sound and fury amounting to nothing", if you prefer that metaphor]. A versioning scheme, unless it is insanely complex [like the madness that is the Cisco ISO versioning], isn't going to matter at all as to what Joe-Sixpack does or does not 'understand'. Joe is (a) not that stupid if (b) he actually cares. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
participants (12)
-
Adam Tauno Williams -
Andreas Jaeger -
Basil Chupin -
Carlos E. R. -
Carlos E. R. -
Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger -
Drew Adams -
jdd -
Kim Leyendecker -
Oddball -
Per Jessen -
Thomas Hertweck