Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3337 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] SUSE version naming
  • From: Pascal Bleser <pascal.bleser@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:58:45 +0200
  • Message-id: <444382F5.9050200@xxxxxxxxx>
Hash: SHA1

houghi wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 01:24:01PM +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
>> Hash: SHA1
>> Thomas Hertweck wrote:
>>> jdd wrote:
>> ...
>>> Back to Linux: I think that the version numbers of SuSE distributions
>>> were not always driven by "technical" aspects but by marketing instead
>>> (at least partly). And, maybe, they still are. When RedHat releases an
>>> Enterprise server 10, Novell needs also something with a version number
>>> 10 at the end of the day. And so on.
>> Exactly.
> If they are only sometimes followed by technical aspects, what were they?

They're never.

>>> In summary: the whole topic about version numbering is more complicated
>>> than one might think as it has of course some commercial side-effect.
>>> This list is mainly looking at this topic from a "technical" point of
>>> view. But in order to come up with a solution that suits everyone (if
>>> it's going to be changed at all), one needs to include the marketing
>>> guys in this discussion...
>> 100% ACK.
>> It's totally useless to discuss/drive that here, IMO it's outside of our
>> scope of action and influence.
>> That's something the Novell marketing dept decides, and I don't see them
>> discussing this with us.
>> Pointless, let's discuss things we can actually have influence on or do
>> ourselves.
> I beg to differ. First I would like to hear what the decision process is.

For what ?
You assume marketing and sales has to do with a process.
That's a wrong assumption IMO ;)

> Just saying 'oh, we can't change is' is not something I am just accepting
> like that. I will accept it when somebody from SUSE (or Novell Marketing)
> tells me that THEY decide and not us and that we have no say in it.

It's like that, because it's 100% marketing in my experience:
9.0 was a 8.x
9.1 was a 9.0
10.0 was a 9.4
10.1 was a 10.0

> So what is the decision making here? Just look at the competition and then
> follow them? Is it all 100% marketing, or is there some technical choice
> as well. If it is all marketing, why do we not have SUSE Linux 11.0?

Because it's SLES 10 and SLED 10, I guess.

- --
-o) Pascal Bleser
/\\ <pascal.bleser@xxxxxxxxx> <guru@xxxxxxxxxxx>
_\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)


< Previous Next >
Follow Ups