On Saturday, December 11, 2010 06:57:58 pm Stephan Kleine wrote:
On Saturday December 11 2010 21:41:52 Kim Leyendecker wrote:
Well, I think if you really think off "evergreen" it seems to be the best choice. At first, almost everybody knows what an evergreen is and if you just watch the "green" it works fine with the openSUSE identity.
You are missing the point since there would be _2_ LTS versions one need to support so people would be able to switch.
IOW if the current LTS is called "$green" and the next one "$green^2" and the one after that "$green^3" we are getting into the buntu realms with stuff like horny horse.
Point being: code names suck!
So, IMHO, just stick to the openSUSE versions the LTS is build upon and add some "this is some LTS version" if "LTS" is too much Ubuntu so one could call a LTS a LTS.
I would use: openSUSE 11.1 Evergreen It solves version problem and it is more in our tradition to use metaphoric names for some versions: Factory (development - like factory assembly line), Tumbleweed (newest software - like following the winds of upstream changes). LTS is for majority of potential users worse than Evergreen. It is acronym that is clear to some computer fans, while word evergreen one can find in any vocabulary from English to any language. Evergreen has association with evergreen plants that live year around, and calling some openSUSE <version> Evergreen will tell potential users more then SAWET (some acronym will ever tell). It has one additional advantage for those that feel bad to follow *buntus in every step :) -- Regards, Rajko -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org