[arch-releng] release vs snapshot terminology (was: Arch Linux release in the press)

[Dieter Plaetinck]

On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:24:18 -0600
Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Gerhard Brauer
> <gerbra at archlinux.de> wrote:
> > Am Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:13:57 +0100
> > schrieb Dieter Plaetinck <dieter at plaetinck.be>:
> >
> >> Good point Gerhard about being more clear in the news.
> >> Could someone with priviliges do a little update of the news item?
> >
> > I mean not for this release, for the next releases (ex. 2009.04).
> > News on heise, linuxmagazin or whatelse are already written, even
> > when we would change our new now...
> 
> Yeah, "going forward" we have to make it more apparent that this is
> not a "release" - perhaps we should change the wording to something
> like "2009.04 Installer" instead of "2009.04 Release" or something.
> Working the word "snapshot" in there would be a good idea too


I don't care whether some news reporter uses the word release or
snapshot, as long as our _users_ know how we work.
Imho we should just make it clear in several places (eg download page,
beginners guide etc), so we can keep using the word "release".
(are really that many users confused now? I have no insight on that)


Sure we have a rolling release model, but still our isos/img's are
definitely not "just" a snapshot:
- they are planned
- we work "towards" them and provide support afterwards
- we do a core freeze a while before, and during the release.
- they are carefully tested.
- we time releases of other packages/tools to "fit" in the iso
  release scheme (eg installer)
- ...


Imho the word "snapshot" doesn't do much justice to our images and
makes it sound like just that, a snapshot.  Most likely if we start
using the word "snapshot" people new to Arch might be more hesitant to
try it out because it doesn't sound like something well
tested/engineered/supported.  Which may be a bigger problem then what
we have now.  Think about it.


Dieter