Le 03/10/2010 10:36, Morgan Leijström a écrit :
Den 2010-10-02 23:26:19 skrev Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI:
I question whether we should be iron-bound to a fixed number, of
whether we should wheel out a new release when it is ready and fit for
consumption.
I agree.
First, i do not like date-named versions at all.
Why not just increment the number each release.
Mageia 1, Mageia 2 etc ?
Second, releases should be stable!
So goals should be set for "next version" but not carved in stone.
For example if KDE6 still is not stable when Mageia is sheduled for release
including KDE6 it should either be delayed until stable, changed to stable
version and released. And task-upgradet-KDE6 in testing, and when stable in
backport.
I think named versions is not so bad. In France, there's a car company
called peugeot and their cars are called 207, 307, 407, and so on.
Honestly what do you prefer :
I have a 307 and it's cool !
I have a Plymouth fury and it's cool
(ok, i didn't used the twingo as an example)
To stop joking, I think there's a real interest about named version.
when you search on the web for a specific probleme for your specifiec
release, the results are more acurate. try to search things with
keywords "mandriva 2009" and try with "ubuntu lucid"
Chag
--
"Ca ne marche pas" ne veut rien dire. Alors ne dites rien (ou développez !)
"it doesn't work" means nothing. So, say nothing (or say more !)
