[opensuse-project] Re: openSUSE versioning scheme
Vincent Untz wrote:
(I'm setting Mail-Followup-To to opensuse-project, since that's where this discussion should happen, but I agree we might want to wait for the end of the strategy discussion)
Le samedi 03 juillet 2010, à 09:10 +0200, Martin Schlander a écrit :
Fredag den 2. juli 2010 17:05:06 skrev Andreas Jaeger:
On Friday 02 July 2010 16:56:04 Thomas Schmidt wrote:
Shouldn't we call this 12.0? Reassigning the features afterwards would be additional work.
Naming of the next release is a separate discussion we might have. I'm opposed to both 11.4 and 12.0 and look forward to great proposals,
Let's not get too creative here. No funky codenames! :-)
We actually have code names, and it's the shades of greens. 11.3 is Teal. We just don't advertize this -- yet. (I think we should).
The codenames are visible on the console. Personally I think codenames ought to remain internal, project-only - like today, but _perhaps_ with a bit more awareness/usage. I really don't like the hip Ubuntu naming and I'd have to use a dictionary to find out what "teal" is. (same goes for most of the Ubuntu names).
We should go for a simple numbering scheme, that doesn't cause the confusion that the old one has (a lot of people give different meanings to the numbers, even though they don't mean a thing - other than of course x.1 meaning "unusually buggy").
Either do it the Fedora way. openSUSE 12, 13, 14 etc.
Or the Mandriva way 2011.0, 2011.1, 2012.0 etc.
(Or the Ubuntu way, except that it doesn't work well with the next version which would be 11.03: 11.03, 11.12, 12.07)
What is wrong with the existing scheme? Two things that come to mind: 1) it's just a continuation of the SuSE Linux numbering 2) there's no implied meaning of '.x' I propose we name the next openSUSE "openSUSE 1.0". Wrt 2), I don't know if we really need/want an implied meaning of the '.x', but maybe we can come up with an idea in the context of strategy. (one thought: even = desktop release, odd = server release?)
One technical side of the decision that was pointed out in an earlier discussion is that we want to keep some suse_version compatibility. That means we still need to have, somehow, 11.3 < $nextversion.
That did occur to me, but I'm unaware of the details. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (25.1°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Le 03/07/2010 11:02, Per Jessen a écrit :
and I'd have to use a dictionary to find out what "teal" is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teal%27c ?? there are several answers possible :-)
What is wrong with the existing scheme?
nobody knows what will be the next one :-). The .x have not the usuall free software meaning (very confusing!) jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://www.facebook.com/pages/I-support-the-Linux-Documentation-Project/3720... http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-fan-page-of-Claire-Dodin/106485119372062?v... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Saturday 2010-07-03 11:13, jdd wrote:
Le 03/07/2010 11:02, Per Jessen a écrit :
and I'd have to use a dictionary to find out what "teal" is.
Think McFly, think. OpenSUSE is all about green - also evidenced by the 11.2 codename Emerald - so Teal is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teal_%28color%29 though that _really_ is darkcyan instead. (And if you ask me, that was a bad color to choose.) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Saturday 03 July 2010 11:02:17 Per Jessen wrote:
[...] What is wrong with the existing scheme? Two things that come to mind:
1) it's just a continuation of the SuSE Linux numbering 2) there's no implied meaning of '.x'
3) The x.y has a meaning in software and we do not leave to it. The changes between 10.3 and 11.0 are as big as between 11.0 and 11.1. The number 11.0 is marketing and has no other effect! I've seen books for openSUSE 11 - implying that 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3 have only minor difference. 4) Confusion with SUSE Linux Enterprise I've seen too often "I'm running SUSE 11.1" - and then found out they run "SUSE Linux Enterprise 11 SP1". A different version scheme might help. Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
Le 04/07/2010 10:38, Andreas Jaeger a écrit :
3) The x.y has a meaning in software and we do not leave to it. The changes between 10.3 and 11.0 are as big as between 11.0 and 11.1. The number 11.0 is marketing and has no other effect! I've seen books for openSUSE 11 - implying that 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3 have only minor difference.
my ISP allows "openSUSE 11" installs on his servers. "11" is still 11.1 and there are major differences from 11.0, 11.1 and 11.2! jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://www.facebook.com/pages/I-support-the-Linux-Documentation-Project/3720... http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-fan-page-of-Claire-Dodin/106485119372062?v... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On Saturday 03 July 2010 11:02:17 Per Jessen wrote:
[...] What is wrong with the existing scheme? Two things that come to mind:
1) it's just a continuation of the SuSE Linux numbering 2) there's no implied meaning of '.x'
3) The x.y has a meaning in software and we do not leave to it. The changes between 10.3 and 11.0 are as big as between 11.0 and 11.1. The number 11.0 is marketing and has no other effect! I've seen books for openSUSE 11 - implying that 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3 have only minor difference.
Which is really a problem with what we put into openSUSE rather than a problem with the versioning scheme :-) I.e. when we're planning a dot-release, it should not have any major changes to the base system. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.3°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Sunday 04 July 2010 10:50:30 Per Jessen wrote:
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On Saturday 03 July 2010 11:02:17 Per Jessen wrote:
[...] What is wrong with the existing scheme? Two things that come to mind:
1) it's just a continuation of the SuSE Linux numbering 2) there's no implied meaning of '.x'
3) The x.y has a meaning in software and we do not leave to it. The changes between 10.3 and 11.0 are as big as between 11.0 and 11.1. The number 11.0 is marketing and has no other effect! I've seen books for openSUSE 11 - implying that 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3 have only minor difference.
Which is really a problem with what we put into openSUSE rather than a problem with the versioning scheme :-) I.e. when we're planning a dot-release, it should not have any major changes to the base system.
it's a real issue. Each project takes versioning different. Some use the odd numbers for testing releases (Gnome), others try to have a very stable .0 and experiment in the .9 range, and again for others the .0 is the first version in a new major series and can be expected to be unstable. IOW many models. However, having a 'random' versioning scheme as it seems openSUSE now has is really confusing. I think it's time to decide on this: are .x releases going to be less (or more!) experimental? Or do we stop using them altogether (keep whole numbers)? or... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Wednesday 2010-07-21 11:41, Jos Poortvliet wrote:
3) The x.y has a meaning in software and we do not leave to it. The changes between 10.3 and 11.0 are as big as between 11.0 and 11.1. The number 11.0 is marketing and has no other effect! I've seen books for openSUSE 11 - implying that 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3 have only minor difference.
Which is really a problem with what we put into openSUSE rather than a problem with the versioning scheme :-) I.e. when we're planning a dot-release, it should not have any major changes to the base system.
it's a real issue. Each project takes versioning different. Some use the odd numbers for testing releases (Gnome), others try to have a very stable .0 and experiment in the .9 range, and again for others the .0 is the first version in a new major series and can be expected to be unstable.
IOW many models. However, having a 'random' versioning scheme as it seems openSUSE now has is really confusing.
And I thought LaTeX converging on 2e is confusing... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Andreas Jaeger -
Jan Engelhardt -
jdd -
Jos Poortvliet -
Per Jessen