Am Sun, 1 Feb 2009 21:42:02 +0100 schrieb Dieter Plaetinck <dieter@plaetinck.be>:
On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 11:43:55 -0800 Thayer Williams <thayerw@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Gerhard Brauer <gerbra@archlinux.de> wrote:
b) Release "branding" Should we have release names? Should we have the release versions (ex. 2009.02) in the splash screens (grub, isolinux) and maybe in /etc/issue? Background is: User should be able to identify which ISO release he currently uses. Having the release version only on ISO/Img-File is sometimes not enough.
I'm not crazy about branding the releases, particularly with codenames and especially in multiple places. If we brand at all then I think a single instance of a datestamp, preferably near the initial setup, would be appropriate.
It's cool to have the release name show up at some places of the *iso* (/etc/issue, /etc/rc.sysinit and in the installation program itself for example) I don't think it should show up at all in the installed system. I don't see the use: rolling releases, keeping things simple et al.
You're right, i don't mean to get these release numbers/names into the installed system - only a way to identify the ISO what the user currently is using. So Thayer's idea having the current iso version/name as a text file is good IMHO. Placing it in the iso9660 structure (where the sqfs files live) and in the booted LiveCD /setup directory is IMHO enough to identify the ISO release - either if the medium is only mounted or booted.
release names: I don't care about them, but I believe enough other people do, so sure let's use them. but let's not waste too much time thinking of/discussion names.
We could try it - getting around 4 names in a year shouldn't be a big problem for us. Otherside this could probably be a good point were the users could come into game, they could make proposals about the next names. Gerhard