On 04/24/2017 09:58 AM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 24 April 2017 at 09:35, Rüdiger Meier
wrote: Who is actually responsible for setting up the Leap repos, Ludwig?
Ludwig is responsible, and the Board consulted with him and he approved the idea of Leap 15 before we considered it with any seriousness, and approved it again once we had decided it was the right course forward.
The reason the announcement was sent when it was precisely because Ludwig is increasingly keen to get the repositories ready, and he needed everyone to know why they'd be versioned the way he's going to be versioning them.
BTW Wasn't there a vote about 42 being Leap's first *version* *number*? A version number *increases* over time otherwise it is no version number. We should not allow the board to ignore the fact that we want to have a version.
The long debate giving Leaps original naming and versioning was only ended when the community used the mailing-lists to clearly and vocally request that the Board step in and decide on the projects behalf.
Given the time pressure involved (Ludwig REALLY wanted to start setting up the projects some weeks ago) the Board felt it was in the projects best interest to continue in the same vein, rather than paralyse Ludwig and our Release Team by encouraging a debate which we weren't able to reach consensus over last time.
There is ONE consensus about version numbers: They have to count upwards (unless the project name changes too). Even some projects which are using random (public/marketing) "version number" like Windows have an internal, machine-readable version number which count upwards. Our machine-readable version number is in /etc/os-release But your "decision" makes it completely useless. It's not possible to use that file from within scripts without hardcoding your insane logic and ideas. But that's impossible. If other projects would also use such stupid version numbers like you then the whole world had to re-think how to upgrade packages. zypper, rpm, apt, ports, whatever would not work if more people would do it similar like our openSUSE board.
And that is, after all, one of the reasons why we have a Board, to make decisions the Project could otherwise have a very hard time making.
There was no hard decision to make. It's not hard to count numbers upwards ...
Generally speaking the Board will NEVER make a decision that everyone would like - because if the Board makes a universally liked decision then there was no reason to involve the Board in the first place.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org