Build Debate: Followup on Build Naming

[Jameson "Chema" Quinn]

Redundancy is not bad. There are people who care about year (it is far
easier to remember that the last time I updated was 2 years ago, than
remember the build number then) and they should have something to "hold on
to". I vote including the year in addition to whatever else, but not using
it to replace major.

2008/4/10 Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com>:

> Agreed.  The date doesn't need to be in the build #, and only makes it
> longer.
> And I don't know how meaningful it is to have a build named "OLPC" -- as
> noted a few times, we are building more than one thing.  If anything, that
> should be a clarifier at the end noting that OLPC was the 'customizer' of
> the build.
>
> SJ
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Aaron Konstam <akonstam at sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 10:32 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > > On Thursday 10 April 2008, Charles Merriam wrote:
> > > > >  Thanks for formalising this, I would also strongly suggest that
> > the
> > > > >  organisation is moved to the far right, and that we get rid of
> > year.
> > > > >
> > > > >  <component> <major> <minor> <bugfix> <organisation>
> > > >
> > > > I strongly suggest we keep the year.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, really, OLPC should release new software at least once per
> > year.
> > > > It should dump support for software two or more years old.   It
> > should
> > > > release based on time, not feature.
> > > >
> > > > Also, why add a minor-minor (bugfix) number?
> > >  I strongly feel that we should not put the year in releases.
> > >
> > > I personally think that we should use
> > > OLPC-<Version>.<bugfix> for the os
> > > so what has previously been called update.1  should be OLPC-2.0
> > >
> > > any bug fixes based on this would be OLPC-2.1 etc
> > >
> > > Dennis
> > The question is really would the date be information that is useful. I
> > am not sure. My feeling is that at the rate things are going with
> > development it would not. Who cares for example if f8 came out in 2007
> > or 2008 and why would that be important information?
> > --
> > =======================================================================
> > The means-and-ends moralists, or non-doers, always end up on their ends
> > without any means. -- Saul Alinsky
> > =======================================================================
> > Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam at sbcglobal.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devel mailing list
> > Devel at lists.laptop.org
> > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20080410/d94d6499/attachment.html>