It is sad to see that interesting thread was stolen by some absolutely irrelevan discussion about numbers. I still have some qeustions about how will it work exactly, hopefully Richard or someone else from the merging initiative will be able to answer it: 1. In context of SLE, what does SP1 means? Does it include only backports of fixes, or does it include version bump as well? Which effectively means, will the core of openSUSE N+0.1 be version updated with the release of SLE SP N+1 or will it stay the same? Good example will be higher Qt5 version requirement for plasma5. 2. How the important updates of core packages will be handled? Good example is recent release of GCC 5, it exposed lots of issues in different pieces of software, but lots of people would like to establish it for some reason. I would assume that the change will not go to SP in SLE, maybe only to next major version. Does it mean the same for openSUSE, or will openSUSE be used as a playground/nightly for SLE to get rid of all possible transition issues before the release of SLE? 3. Will it be possible to have different repos for core of the system (not sure if that's what Ring 0 and Ring 1 stands for) and other pieces of the system? With some previous releases of openSUSE adding updated KDE repositories allowed the unholy mix of official/updated versions if there were any package name changes, which became obvious only much later. Would be great to have built-in defence against such cases by making it just separate repository. On Saturday 23 May 2015 14:24:46 Richard Brown wrote:
On 23 May 2015 at 14:06, Angelos Tzotsos
wrote: I would strongly suggest not to make such a version jump: 1. It is bad for marketing 3. It is awkward
Why? What is the reasoning behind those statements?
2. It confuses users
I actually see any confusion caused by the big change in version numbering as an opportunity, not a problem. It will lead to questions from our users "Why the big change? What is the difference from 13.2 and before?" and these are *exactly* the kind of questions we want to have our users ask, so we can answer them with very clear messages about the change to the Regular Release, how it will now be based on SLE Sources, how it'll be more stable, with a new schedule, with a new way of being built.
I therefore think calling the next release openSUSE 42 or 42.1 is both very good for 'marketing' in general and our users specifically, it'll get their attention and we just need to make sure we also support this with clear, concise information about the nature of the Regular Releases in the future.
4. It blocks us from another major version decision in the future i.e. what will be the version when something similar happens: openSUSE 154.1?
Sure, why not? openSUSE version numbers have always been a work of meaningless fiction (eg. in the Old Model, numbers would change totally arbitrarily and have no meaning behind them at all openSUSE 12.3 -> 13.1 was not a 'major release', we could have called it openSUSE)
As long as we clearly explain the logic and meaning (or lack thereof) behind the openSUSE version numbering scheme, I don't think we're limited in what we can do if an idea like this crops up again.
-- Regards, Stas -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org