On the subject of naming the Dapper successor

[Anders Karlsson]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:12:17 -0000, Mark Shuttleworth <mark at canonical.com>  
wrote:

> John Pinner wrote:
>> are relatively obscure, but Ubuntu has feisty codes like 'Breezy Badger'
>> which slip off the tongue easily and mean something to those involved,
>
> Feisty. Hmm.. Funny you should mention that one ;-)
>
> I do think the code names get wider attention than perhaps we expected,
> and it's worth us having a think about how we get wider adoption of the
> more formal release identifiers.
>
> I've also been thinking about the version numbers. Perhaps we should be
> more explicit about the year/month thing?
>
>   Ubuntu 2006/04
>   Ubuntu 2006-04
>   Ubuntu Dog-04
>
> Thoughts welcome.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with 6.04, 2006-04 or 2006/04. 6.04
_looks_ more like a version number however. What people seem to be
most confused about is why the version number 'jumps', i.e. goes from
5.10 to 6.04 with no intermediate steps. Pointing out the link to
year and month always produce that short silence followed by an
'Ahaah'.

I would like to flag a potential problem with the idea about using
the Chinese Zodiac, it only has twelve animals, so after twelve years
you could get a potintial clash, and with a strict 26 week release
cycle, you will eventually get close to Chinese New Year, meaning
that for one Zodiac animal year potentially you could end up doing
three releases, the last one having the same minor or minor-1 number
as the first release in that Zodiac animal year. (I have not tried to
calculate it, just saying it is a possibility.)

Codenames is a good idea, and I hope they are here to stay. :)

-- 
Anders Karlsson <anders at trudheim.com>
QA Engineer | GnuPG Key ID - 0x4B20601A