Tirsdag den 18. september 2012 15:30:03 skrev Stephan Kulow:
On 17.09.2012 08:59, Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a DimStar wrote:
Quoting Bryen M Yunashko <suserocks@bryen.com>:
This is yet another reason why I think the once-a-year release of openSUSE could be appealing. Not only would it be appealing from a technical and support perspective, but even in amrketing we'd finally do away with .x's altogether. Just have openSUSE released once a year to reflect the year. openSUSE-12 or openSUSE 2012, and 2013, and 2014, and so on. Or, if we want to get really weird, o2p0enS1U2E. (Just to freak people out, LOL)
If we want to consider it (not advocating for or against here): The 'upcoming release' (currently named 12.3, scheduled 'some-when in 2013' would be the perfect candidate to introduce it: - If we call it openSUSE 13, it reflects the year (and until 2099 we're safe with the version scheme) and is > 12.2, which was the latest release, thus not breaking the 'counting scheme' - If we call it openSUSE 2013, then well, the point is a bit moot.. this would always work.
A yearly release sounds intriguing, but 'official respins' with 'some' marketing coverage might be interesting to do then. Simple example: GNOME has 2 releases per year; if we happen to release openSUSE 13
I see a *huge* fragementation issue with a one year cycle - especially if people dance the Tumbleweed and Respin dance. This would mean even less people work even less time on Factory.
Yep. The people arguing for a 12 month release cycle seem to have some questionable assumptions, e.g. that this automatically makes releases much more stable and polished, and that the same number of people will contribute and test under those circumstances. Personally I'm very much for sticking to the 8 months. 12 months is too darn long for users and developers alike - and 6 months is too short. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org