On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 08:20:43PM -0400, Bill Bogstad wrote: > I've been watching this thread since it began and understand that from > a marketing perspective numbers are 'ugly'.
Numbers are for the developers, ice cream flavours are for the press / GUI users, as I understand it. > On the other hand, everyone seems to acknowledge that numbers make > it easier to track things from a development and deployment support > perspective. Obviously, that works best if the numbers are > consistent. > Unfortunately the number usage has NOT been consistent. Every numerical series has been monotonically increasing. They're completely consistent; you just seem to find them surprising. To wit: > Martin's original web page with proposed logos seems to indicate that > the SoaS Strawberrry release was release 1. "SoaS 1" is also what > shows up on the the 'ugly?' text oriented plymouth start up screen for > Strawberry as well. Consistent. Yes, the text screen is ugly. I wish it weren't, but oh well. > On the other hand, the CD labels as well as the ISO filenames for > Strawberry and its test releases all referred to themselves as > SoaS2. CD labels, yes. ISO filenames, no: http://download.sugarlabs.org/soas/releases/soas-strawberry.iso For the CD labels, boot screens, etc., that mention "SoaS2": this is not the same as the marketing "release number" that is what's on the page discussing the marketing naming ("Martin's original web page"). I agree this is surprising and not optimal. But it's consisent, as SoaS2 is not the marking release number. > The current Blueberry? beta ISO calls itself SoaS3 internally in > the same places that Strawberry calls itself SoaS2. ...consistent... > From a deployment support perspective, this is not a good thing. Apart from being shown on the boot screen and /etc/issue, which the people you're worried about should never see, where is this an issue? > Unfortunately, I can't think of anyway to sink the numbers up again > that won't result in additional possibilities for confusion. How about just calling the Blueberry release "SoaS2" everywhere? Or just marketing the next release as v3? > Are we stuck documenting the fact that the official release number > and plymouth displayed versions are always one less then the CD > label and ISO filename? ibid. The ISO filename does not include a release number. The ISO filename is soas-strawberry.iso. > Bill Bogstad Martin
pgpEqqt5daz7H.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
