[arch-releng] 2009.02 name ideas
jamaris at gmail.com
Wed Feb 4 09:51:41 EST 2009
Like mentioned before, /etc/release might be a good idea. And it would also
be nice if gnome's system monitor showed that name in the system information
tab. I don't know however where gnome's system monitor gets that
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Dieter Plaetinck <dieter at plaetinck.be>wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 12:26:00 +0100
> Jeroen Maris <jamaris at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think it would be wise to stay with the version numbering that we
> > have right now, for example 2009.02 for the release coming this
> > month. If any bug is found in the 2009.02-1 release, there can come a
> > 2009.02-2 release, and so forth. The development versions for the
> > 2009.02 series would be called 2009.02-alpha1, 2009.02-beta and
> > 2009.02-rc, etcetera. The final version would be 2009.02-1.
> > This way we would never run out of version numbers, one can see in
> > the blink of an eye when a release was made, and this way of version
> > numbering is very consistent and logical. The only downside that I
> > can find about this way of versioning is what Dieter Plaetinck said
> > on 2 februari, that it could interfere with flyspray references, that
> > need to be updated in case a release can't be made in a certain month.
> > --
> > Jeroen Maris
> Maybe we if miss the right month (like we did now) we should just say
> "fuck it" and release it as 2009-01 anyway. Less confusion, no problems
> like beta's being released in january and finals in februari, no need
> to change references after date, etc.
> Will people really care that much that in february we do a release
> called 2009-01 ?
> It would make everything a bit easier, so let's keep it simple!
> That said, I like Dan's 'winter/summer' proposal. Technically there's
> the same problem because seasons switch on specific dates, but no-one
> will be too pedantic about that. (just like we shouldn't be with date
> based releases)
> I think Abhishek explained it well (depend on nothing), but I think it's
> good to have some idea at which point in time/ along with which kernel
> version a release was done. We just shouldn't be 100% strict about it.
> About the question which name we will pick, I'll find some online
> polling thing tonight if I have time and put the proposals on it. then
> we can vote. if we can't reach a consensus maybe we can just.. take
> the one I or Gerhard prefer :))
> I don't even know how we will technically add the names to the
> release.. Aaron?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the arch-releng