On 08/05/2012 12:32 AM, Richard Vickery wrote:
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com
<mailto:a...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On 08/01/2012 12:51 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Am I the only person who thinks that the whole idea should be
dropped?
> I never, ever, heard anyone refer to Fedora-17 as Fedora Beefy
Miracle
> (if that is indeed the right name).
No, you're not the only one. We discussed this at the time.
We took a vote. Your side lost.
Andrew.
I kind of like the idea of naming; it says that we're creative. Sure
there are some conservative types who think that names are not cool;
these people probably don't think much of Tux either. Then there are
the creative types, who number just as many, or in our case , more,
who think that naming the distributions is a better plan than not; and
we probably work better as a group because of it.
Let's not think of it in terms of winning and losing, but of
collaboration and support for the betterment of the task at hand -
making us better as a team.
Well, here's my 2ยข: I think naming is dumb, *because* there is no
logical sequence to it--the reader does not know whether the named
version is current, last year's, or 2005's.
Even one of the other distros, where the names are selected in
alphabetical order, like hurricanes, is confusing, since the names are
so weird and forgettable. Call me a
stick-in-the-mud--you won't be the first--but I'd much prefer month and
year for version identifiers, like PCLOS does. That makes the sequence
obvious to the most casual
of readers.
--doug
--
Blessed are the peacemakers...for they shall be shot at from both sides.
--A.M. Greeley
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
