On 04/25/2017 06:11 PM, ianseeks wrote:
On Tuesday, 25 April 2017 07:19:56 BST Eric Schirra wrote:
Am 2017-04-25 00:29, schrieb Markos Chandras:
On 04/24/2017 11:14 PM, Simon Lees wrote:
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.
Well, yes, but then you need to explain over and over why 15 is newer than 42 and why this was considered to be a good decision.. And while it's somewhat easy to explain all that in this list, openSUSE is also being discussed in so many other places so you can't really contain it and prevent people from making the wrong assumptions about this decision.
However, if you rename the whole thing then people will disassociate Leap/42 with Foobar/15 so no questions will be asked (at least not as many as we are asking right now)
I think also peaople saying the same.
For me, when it should be unconditional 15.x, the best is openSUSE Leap 15.x
Because it gives SLE, Tumbleweed and Leap. You can easily differnt between this "versions". It's very clearly and easy.
Why not just drop "Leap" as unnecessary baggage and have SLE, Tumbleweed and opensuse. I'm guessing there will be no more "Leap"s in development, only evolution due to keeping in line with SLE.
Because as I have said previously those of us developing tumbleweed, sometimes need a generic way to separate between a change for all versions of tumbleweed and all versions of Leap and being able to reference Leap, rather then "next stable LTS service pack" is quite convenient. We also finally have consistent branding between our two operating systems which are both supported equally based off the phrasing "Tumbleweed" and "Leap" check http://opensuse.org to see this I don't see why we should break this branding just because we decided to make a version jump backwards (Yes I agree in principle jumping backwards is rather silly, even more so then using 42 as a version). I guess I'll save this text somewhere for the next time someone makes this comment without reading the thread in entirety. -- 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