openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marcus <>
Subject Re: 4.1.4 Release Manager?
Date Fri, 16 Sep 2016 18:11:03 GMT
Am 09/16/2016 02:07 PM, schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
>> From: Jim Jagielski []
>>>> Any real reason to name it 4.2.0 ?
>>> Two years of miscellaneous changes and fixes, a radically
>> improved build system, unit tests at build time, updates of a
>> lot of libraries, support for new languages, new
>> translations, new dictionaries... if this is not 4.2.0 it
>> should be named 5.0.
>> That was kind of my thoughts... or maybe call it 4.5.0
>> The idea is to represent the "re-charged" AOO project with
>> a meaningful change in version.
> OK, an idea which I understand.
> But one could, in this context, not to think about a completely different way of
> naming?
> (a)
> What if we took us Ubuntu as an example?
> Ubuntu 4.16 is called "Xenial Xerus" and AOO 4.2 or 4.5 or 5.0 (and so on) might
> be called "Lively Phoenix"? (just an example)

as an addition to the numbering schema this could work. Then we can give 
the release a special touch/meaning/expression or whatever is best for 
the respective release time frame.

> (b)
> Or you choose a more formal type of label them.
> OK, "AOO XP" would probably not so great, but what would be, for example, with
> "AOO NE" (for new experience)?

 From the view point of a normal user I find it confusing as there is no 
comparsion pattern and you don't know what was first and was next.

I think that the reason that Microsoft has come back to numbers for the 
versioning schema. I don't see any need to go their way, make the same 
experience and come back to the numbers.

So, please no version numbering with words/text only.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message