Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (465 mails)

< Previous Next >
[opensuse-project] Re: openSUSE versioning scheme (was Re: [opensuse-factory] Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Can we please get ARM builds for 11.3+1?)
  • From: Andreas Jaeger <aj@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2010 10:18:50 +0200
  • Message-id: <201007041018.51082.aj@xxxxxxxxxx>
On Saturday 03 July 2010 10:11:48 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

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).

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)

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. I'm unsure if
it's really a hard limitation, though: we could do something like
Solaris/SunOS where we have an internal scheme for technical purposes
and an external one (Solaris 10 == SunOS 5.10). It makes things a bit
complex, though, so there has to be a really good reason to do so ;-)

Or something similar. But maybe it would be best to await the
conclusion of the strategy discussion before making any more major
project decisions.

I just want to point out that the fact we'll get a decision for a
strategy is also a good opportunity to change the versioning scheme:
it's a good way to signal the change in the project.

There are also other reasons to change it, like the fact that the
current scheme is hardly understandable by many (most?), leading to the
11.4/12.0 confusion we're seeing.

What I would propose for now is to create a simple wiki page summarizing
the current state with pros and cons for changing of the version number,
and start collecting alternatives,

Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{,}
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
< Previous Next >