Build Debate: Followup on Build Naming

[Morgan Collett]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Simon Schampijer <simon at schampijer.de> wrote:
> 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.

We need to call it something while it's proposed / under development,
and before we know exactly when it will ship. Some distros use
codenames while it's under development, and then the final release is
named accordingly. (For example, what if a release we think will come
out in late 2008 slips to 2009?)

Otherwise, strict time-based releases would be required (which I'm in
favour of, but I don't know if that decision has been taken yet...)

Morgan