On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Aleix Pol <aleix...@kde.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Marco Calignano < > marco.calign...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Why do we have to start with A? I guess we can (at least for the first >> release name) find the name of the fish that better represent the >> characteristic of Plasma 2 . Like a fish that is fast and pretty to look >> at, or maybe rare but wanted because is good. >> All other release can go in alphabetical order or not, why do we have to, >> if we also have the version year and month that tells us the chronology? >> Only because Kubuntu does that? I think it is limiting, I suggest to stick >> with a marine name but forget the alphabetical order, or at least the >> starting point being A. >> >> Cheers >> Marco >> >> Using alphabetical order is useful to be able to compare two release > names and be able to know which one is older and more or less how far apart. > Wasn't one of the concerns (I think by Alex) that Kubuntu devs are always talking "raring" or "saucy" and we never know which version it is; so that we should always talk the version numbers instead (and even not knowing the fish name beforehand)? If people agreed on always using the date version when talking about a release, using random names would not be a problem I think. However using an alphabetical order seems just more practical because people will keep using fish names when communicating, so it would at least make our (as in developers) lives easier. *shrug* Cheers -- Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
_______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
