[arch-dev-public] thoughts about next release
jason at archlinux.org
Sun May 13 15:19:31 EDT 2007
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 09:56:10PM +0300, Roman Kyrylych wrote:
> 2007/5/11, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com>:
> > On 5/11/07, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I don't mind about a fun. :)
> > > But those files do state, that user is running some _release_ which is
> > > not true because of Rolling Release System (tm) ;-)
> > Ah, I get your point now. It does make sense.
> > How about a change from "version X.Y" to "Codename: FOO" i.e. "Codename: Duke"
> A bit better.
> It will be fun when user will be surprised by new codename after one
> of -Syu on the next reboot. :-D
> 2007/5/11, Dale Blount <dale at archlinux.org>:
> > Why don't we keep labeling release CDs as such but have pacman write the
> > date to /etc/arch-release on successful -Su (or -Syu maybe)? It always
> > did bother me that at times you could get a newer release than was
> > actually available for download. This way we'd know exactly last time
> > the system was updated.
> Hm... sounds interesting...
> Looks like a decent idea to Arch. :-)
> Not so good to other distros with Pacman, that probably won't have
> Rolling Release System, but that can be solved.
I don't think I like the idea of displaying the last time they updated in
/etc/issue. No one is going to get a warm fuzzy feeling because they
updated 2007-05-13 12:17:50. It's just random noise on the login screen.
Having a codename show up is much more interesting though. We are still
having releases, the difference is that the releases are driven by kernel
versions. If we display the code name, people will at least know when new
cds are out.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the arch-dev-public