> But I can't see what's wrong with codenames. It's not just a "tradition",
> it's standard practice in most fields of endeavour. You slap a name on
> a project, and everyone knows what they're talking about. Unlike numbers,
> names are memorable and unambiguous (when well-chosen).
AFAICT codenames are common before a project is released. They're much
less common afterwards.
> You don't have to memorize all of Debian's codenames in order, do you?
I regularly have to figure out which of Buster/Bookworm/Bullseye/... is
stable/testing/oldstable, and I must admit that I tend to forget and end
up having to look it up.
Stefan
