On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 10:42:15PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote: > Jonathan Stowe wrote: > >On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 16:11 +0100, Robert Rothenberg wrote: > >>I was a clone and decided to upgrade Ubuntu from Egregious Eft to > >>Festering > >>Fawn. Sh'loads of hate.... > >And there I was thinking that the bloody stupid names were all that > >there was to hate about it. > > The stupid name hate, of course, also applies to Debian. Its fans > always talk about "Sarge" and "Woody" and "Cockgobbler", desperately > trying to hide those nasty version numbers from the world.
This is partly because as developers they think about the versions that are under development, instead of the versions which have shipped. I don't think they number them until kinda late in the cycle (maybe I'm wrong.) It's still awful of course. I, along with 99.99% of users don't really care about "Etch". People running production servers, as you say, are going to want to know version numbers, and track (or not) a given version. People running desktops are going to want to track a given level of newness/unpleasantness. The majority of individual users who run the crap are going to run "Stable" "Testing" or "unstable" depending upon their levels of concern about obselescence and bugs. Does a desktop user want to run the same release of Debian ... FOREVER? If you read the Debian docs, they apparently think you do. -josh
