Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3337 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] SUSE version naming
  • From: Joop Boonen <joop_boonen@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 19:51:17 +0200
  • Message-id: <44428415.9020504@xxxxxx>
houghi wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 04:46:08PM +0200, Joop Boonen wrote:
>
>> I think it's the numbering is very logical. Only for 10.x it was a bit out
>> of tune.
>>
>> X.0 is the pre new kernel version.
>> 8.0 was pre 2.4 kernel (2.4 was test kernel) 8.1 was 2.4 kernel
>> 9.0 was pre 2.6 kernel (2.6 was test kernel) 9.1 was 2.6 kernel
>>
>
> Please do not toppost.
> It is incorrect. 8.0 was 2.4.18 and 7.3 was 2.4.9., 7.1 was 2.2 as was 6.4
> Then 10.0 should have been called 8.3 or even lower as 4.3
> It also is very illogical. 0 should never be the last, it should be the
> first.
> <snip>
>
>
I've already dsent a correction. 7.0 was pre 2.4. I think 7.0 would
have been 2.4 and 9.0 would have been 2.6. But the finale release didn't
match the planned date. So this would have persponed the release.
>> I personally prefer numbers as the dat or some wierd name doesn't mean
>> anything to me. x.1 id newer than x.0. That is very clear. Look the latest
>> version up on the internet.
>>
>
> I also would not like a name. Or at least not ONLY a name. It should be
> someting that identifies the date.
>
>
>> I hope SuSE will never move to NT, 2000, XP, Vista etc. Instead of 4.0,
>> 4.1, 5 and 5.1?
>>
>
> 2000 is OK as a name if you publish it in 2000 and it is the only version
> coming out that year.
>
>
What is the advantage of numbering with the year? Only M$ uses names. I
haven't heart any objections for Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, Netware, MAC OS X.
>> (May be an option might be an odd and even sceam like with the kernel, odd
>> is test/unstable even is stable?)
>>
>
> That is not the case anymore.
>
> Oh! Another way of numbering could be using the first few digits of the
> Unix time. :-) Just see wich ones are needed to determine the month or
> period of the month and have the rest asued to be filled with 0.
>
> houghi
>


< Previous Next >