On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 10:37, Greg Meyer wrote: ... > I agree with you wholeheartedly, however the point I was trying to make was > that as we all sit around here and discuss these things, very often we have > that discussion based on what we think a particular term, like beta, rc or > stability mean, without acknowledging the way MandrakeSoft means them. I do > not believe that we should not communicate with the company to try to get > them to change their definition, or modify thier way of thinking. Perhaps > changing the way releases are numbered, so that common perception aligns with > reality is the way to go, but as an alternative to your proposal, instead of > changing the MandrakeSoft release philosophy, change the numbering so there > are no longer any point releases. 10 and 11 vs 9.1 and 9.2. Although this > would align reality more with what peoples understandings of releases are, I > acknowledge that it does not address your criticism about bug fixing. ...
I think this is the most reasonable course of action; it assuages symptoms and concerns without imposing more stress on MandrakeSoft. That way, instead of continually re-explaining that Mandrake doesn't follow the convention of bleeding-edge in x.0, increasing stability in x.1,2, Mandrake and its users can simply say "it's a different release strategy." Date-based release name is certainly one good way to imply this philosophy, but it has a few bad marketing implications. Code names are fun, but people will probably gripe. Sticking with the ordinal numbers and losing the decimals is probably the best option. -- Jack Coates Monkeynoodle: A Scientific Venture...
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
