Well the point I'm going for that beyond a technical issue - communications wise it doesn't matter really. As long as whatever you say contains some indication that its the older version.
As for the technical side of things - I can't comment. But from a communicative standpoint it really isn't that big a deal if its packaged correctly in communications. On Monday 07 July 2014 10.47.00 Jonathan Riddell wrote: > It's not good to rename stuff which has already been released. When > KDE branding all changed we still used the terms KDE 3 and KDE 4 to > talk about old releases, try to be a revisionist rarely works. > > Jonathan > > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 11:44:32AM +0200, Jens Reuterberg wrote: > > Someone said "branding" so I appeared like a Bloody Mary figure in the > > mirror. > > > > Why not Plasma 4? Or "Plasma Past"? I mean in all honesty the issue isn't > > that big except from a communicative aspect (in which case "Plasma Past", > > "Former Plasma" etc are all good) or a technical aspect (in which case > > the 4.12.something or just Plasma 4 works) > > > > On Monday 07 July 2014 10.16.44 Jonathan Riddell wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 10:36:00AM +0100, John Layt wrote: > > > > Co-installabilty of Plasma 4 and Plasma 5 with minimal work required > > > > by the distros is a must if we want to avoid the mess of KDE4. > > > > Already openSUSE has announced that you can't have both installed at > > > > once, which will force people to choose one or other, when what we > > > > really want is for them to be able to try Plasma 5 out while still > > > > being able to switch back to 4 if there are things that break their > > > > workflow. > > > > > > They won't be co-installable just as konsole won't be co-installable > > > with its kdelibs4 version, it's a new version of the same programme. > > > But the parts that are used by applications, libraries and runtime > > > parts need to be co-installable so kdelibs4 and kf5 applications can > > > be installed on the same system. > > > > > > Your e-mail also highlights a branding issue, now that we are calling > > > the new version of Plasma, Plasma 5 what do we call the old version. > > > I've been calling it Plasma 1 as that was the version number used and > > > it's not a good idea to be revisionist. > > > > > > Jonathan > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Plasma-devel mailing list > > > Plasma-devel@kde.org > > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Plasma-devel mailing list > > Plasma-devel@kde.org > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Plasma-devel mailing list > Plasma-devel@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel