+1 for this
2015-07-10 18:19 GMT+09:00 Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org>: > Adam Lawson wrote: > > The alternative of course is to just number the releases since names > > ultimately don't mean anything but it seems there are problems with that > > level of simplicity. I personally prefer Tristan's suggestion to keep it > > as simple as possible. In a few years we'll run out of letters anyway. > > Part of the confusion here is that we are not naming "releases". We are > naming release *cycles*. We are giving a name to a period of time, > basically. In that period of time, various version numbers for various > components will be released. Saying "Glance 12.0.0 was released in > OpenStack 13 cycle" is not really helping. > > We won't run out of letters, because the names can cycle back to A > (potentially using a new theme, away from "geographic features near > where the corresponding design summit happened"). > > So while we could technically name a release cycle "14", I feel it's a > bit more difficult to rally around a number than a name. Also, numbers > wouldn't really solve the perceived issues with names: numbers happen to > also be culturally meaningful. You don't have a 13th floor in many US > buildings. In China, building miss the 4th floor instead. 9 is feared in > Japan. And don't talk about 39 to Afghans. > > I think "growing up" is accepting the pain that comes with picking a > good name, rather than sidestepping the issue. > > -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org > Unsubscribe : > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
