Am 09/18/2016 07:45 AM, schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Hmm, does anyone know an artist that has some time and can draw a splash
screen?
I would love to see the next edition Called 4.1.3 Phoenix addition, And
I would love to see a Splashscreen that shows an Phönix carry the AOOo
Logo upward.
That would make a statement. Actually thinking of it, if this is liked
by the community I would pledge 50 Euro for an acceptable artwork (means
liked by AOOo. If this is dev or all involved we could discuss.).
Haha.


a new splash screen would be indeed cool. But for a bugfix release? No, let's do this art work for 4.2.0. Then we will have more time for ideas, too.

for the followup release I would stay with 4.2.0 as the /life, the
universe and everything Version of OOo. I actually like that too much./

+1

Marcus



On 16.09.2016 20:11, Marcus wrote:
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.

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

Reply via email to