Am 09/16/2016 02:07 PM, schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]


Any real reason to name it 4.2.0 ?

Two years of miscellaneous changes and fixes, a radically
improved build system, unit tests at build time, updates of a
lot of libraries, support for new languages, new
translations, new dictionaries... if this is not 4.2.0 it
should be named 5.0.


That was kind of my thoughts... or maybe call it 4.5.0

The idea is to represent the "re-charged" AOO project with
a meaningful change in version.

OK, an idea which I understand.

But one could, in this context, not to think about a completely different way of
naming?

(a)
What if we took us Ubuntu as an example?

Ubuntu 4.16 is called "Xenial Xerus" and AOO 4.2 or 4.5 or 5.0 (and so on) might
be called "Lively Phoenix"? (just an example)

as an addition to the numbering schema this could work. Then we can give the release a special touch/meaning/expression or whatever is best for the respective release time frame.

(b)
Or you choose a more formal type of label them.
OK, "AOO XP" would probably not so great, but what would be, for example, with
"AOO NE" (for new experience)?

From the view point of a normal user I find it confusing as there is no comparsion pattern and you don't know what was first and was next.

I think that the reason that Microsoft has come back to numbers for the versioning schema. I don't see any need to go their way, make the same experience and come back to the numbers.

So, please no version numbering with words/text only.

Marcus

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Reply via email to