On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 13:26:46 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 06:26:46PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>I'm just not sure we should really call it "cygwin-1.7". What would >>be a good name, which does not refer to the actual version number? >> >> "Cygwin" with uppercase C? > >I don't think making it differ by case is a good idea. This is bound >to cause problems for Windows somehow.
I agree. >cygwin-xp? cygwin-2008? > >cygwin-nextgen? I'd lean towards cygwin-2008. As we have learned with the various Microsoft products, the "year" in a product or distribution name is only tangentially related to the product's lifespan, birthdate, or end-of-life. Plus using cygwin-2008 doesn't restrict us from continuing to use it with cygwin-1.9, cygwin-1.11, etc in the future -- unless we have a paradigm-breaking new release (again), like cygwin-1.7 is. I doubt such a thing would occur twice in one year. If we do choose to name the release directory "cygwin-2008", we probably ought to try to get cygwin-1.7 out the door before, say, Christmas, tho. <g> -- Chuck
