Some good labelling system so we know it is xubuntu-gutsy-alternate rather than ubuntu

[Vincent]

On 14/06/07, Cody Somerville <cody.somerville at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/14/07, Jim Campbell <jwcampbell at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 6/14/07, Freddy Martinez <freddymartinez9 at ubuntu.com > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm ignoring the fact that downloading the files to the same folder
> > > would result in the files overwriting each other.  :)
> > > Actually not, I have a few disk images and this is my output:
> > > freddy at omg-gnus:~/Desktop$ ls | grep gutsy
> > > gutsy-desktop-i386(2).iso
> >
> >     gutsy-desktop-i386(3).iso
> >
> > > gutsy-desktop-i386.iso
> >
> >
> >
> > omg-gnus?  :)
> >
> > Point taken . . .   however you still can't tell which ISO is
> > k/x/ubuntu...
> >
>
> Exactly. ISO Testers are, naturally, going to be downloading multiple
> isos. Naming them logically would assist them by remove a taxing overhead.
> Considering the triviality of the request, I think it has merit.
>


So then what would it have to be? Do we have to append the build number to
the filename so ISO testers can have multiple ISO's without having to
rename? Or should we assume them to overwrite their previous test ISO.

Oh, wait... If we just use a "xubuntu-gutsy" filename then it won't
overwrite, so they still have a way to differentiate between newer and older
tests.


-- 
Vincent
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/xubuntu-devel/attachments/20070614/6dd54039/attachment.html>