-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 26 February 2003 06:34 pm, Jack Coates wrote: > 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.
It also will QUICKLY run Mandrake out of viable numbers and would then need a new naming scheme. How about stop jumping full digits so semi-randomly? Since each release is virtually a new release rather than a bugfix, just go with that and use the decimal place to delimit cooker vs real release? To borrow loosely from kernel development, odd decimal numbers would be for Cooker, even for the release, ie, 8.1 is a cooker development system and 8.2 is the release that was based on 8.1 (cooker). Then it would work out that we are coming up on the next release at 8.4, as the current cooker would be 8.3. Are we really to get a Mandrake 24.0 within just a year or so? Really? The next release after that might then jump to 31.0, considering the numeric jump from 8.2 to 9.0. If you are going to use numbers to name your release, you need to conserve the significant digits or it will soon become unwieldy and ridiculous (Mandrake 105.2). praedor -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+XhmXwDUPEkSvRHERAo6wAJ9S6ZTAGGyNqmMjDjuAVCuEjqL3xgCfRrdv 4AHY1bG51tcSLCkeKywKTKM= =vh2d -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
