Build Debate: Followup on Build Naming

[Simon Schampijer]

Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Monday 07 April 2008, Michael Stone wrote:
>> cjb, cscott, and I just chatted about build names. We have absolutely no
>> problem announcing official-703 (when candidate-703 becomes official)
>> under whatever name seems good but we have no consensus about what that
>> name should be. cscott proposes '8.1' on the basis that it will be our
>> first 2008 release. mstone thought we should bake a month into the name
>> (perhaps 2008.04 or April-2008). Scott strongly preferred to avoid
>> baking a month designator into the name because, as best I understand,
>> he thinks we cannot afford to ship another release until we've made
>> 'enough' improvement in at least one of our (approximately) four
>> networking scenarios.

I like scott's proposal '8.1'. Putting a month or a 
season(summer/winter) there restrict us - and since we have seen that 
'update.1' has taken longer than expected it would be wise not to.

> I honestly think we should call it OLPC 2  which matches the cvs/build tag and 
> signifies release number 2 
> 
> OLPC 1 being ship.2 
> 
> then we just increment the number for each stable release.  we have a 
> development codename of joyride.  we can create a name for each release.

This would work for me as well - though the extra information of 
(year/release) is not available here.

Simon