On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Jim Henderson <hendersj@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 07 May 2009 08:26:58 +1000, Mark V wrote:
I think product release/support policies are quite separate from naming schemes - the proposal is simply to bring some important information forward instead of it being buried on a 'lifetime' wiki page that very few look at.
I think this is a key statement, Mark - product release/support policies should be separate from naming schemes. Thus the release/support dates shouldn't really be used as part of the naming scheme. :-)
Perhaps I diagree with my self now :) see below. If the support date is really fixed then I'm willing to make the compromise to place that data front and center of casual users. One can even make that the support policy _should_ be the naming scheme. Example: Currently openSUSE has a policy of approx 2 year lifetime. Say that 'lifespan' becomes the rule of thumb. If circumstances change and the community decides it wants to reduce lifespans (to reduce the community's workload, or whatever reason).... now there is a problem. If the EOL date is built into the naming convention this is much less a problem, just relase with a shorter date and everyone will know. So I suppose one can actually make the case that the effects of the 'lifetime' policy (the expiry date) should be as visible as possible.... The potential problems (the known unknowns) of the end-of-life naming scheme so far are: 1) openSUSE introduces something like Ubuntus LTS where an older relase can outlive a newer release. 2) openSUSE end-of-life dates become adjustable after a final release is published Are those risks worth the benefit? Cheers
Jim
-- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org