On 04/25/2017 06:56 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 04/24/2017 01:32 PM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Monday, 24 April 2017 12:07 Simon Lees wrote:
On 04/24/2017 07:06 PM, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
In a real company/product (like SLE), there would be a PR and sales department preventing from jumping backwards surely. Just because openSUSE does not have these two suddenly makes it ok?
SUSE does have some of those people, I believe they chose to jump from 12 to 15 which is what triggered this change in the first place.
Right. But what openSUSE Board just decided to do is could be rather compared to the hypothetical (I sincerely hope) situation if in a few years our marketing guys said "we did some more research and apparently IT people are not as afraid of 13 and 14 as we thought, let's do SLE13 as next version (i.e. after 15)". Just skipping from 12 to 15 could be rather compared to skipping from 13 to 42.
Michal Kubeček
Sounds like a lot of these problems could have been avoided if SLE simply went for 45 instead of 15. Honestly, that couldn't have been any worse than jumping backwards.
In such cases is almost always better to rename the project, in this case 'Leap' to something else, to signal this major change and avoid confusion. Just like it happened for 13.X and Leap. Because going backwards is a major change and we will have to explain the reasoning for quite a while.
But when we changed the name from openSUSE 13.X to openSUSE Leap it was because the way we develop openSUSE Leap with a SLE base is fundamentally different to the way we developed openSUSE in the past, we haven't changed the way were developing openSUSE here so there really is no reason to remove "Leap" as "Leap 15.X" will still be developed the same way "Leap 42.X" was. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B