[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: And next name after Sarge? or PROPOSAL for Codenames' election



(removing debian-policy as per Manoj's wishes)

On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 05:09:59PM +0100, Xan wrote:
> Hello to everybody,
> 
> Recently, I'm worried about the election of codenames of Debian: 1) how they 
> are choosen and by who, and 2) what will happen when the Toy Story names 
> finish.

1) You've already been told (RM)

2) There are _a lot_ of Toy story names, you have a mild excuse since the 
DDP CVS service is not yet back up the following comments in the same 
document you cite are of use:

     90 <!--
     91   characters not used from Toy Story (yet):
     92     - Andy (the kid)
     93     - Etch (Etch-a-Sketch) (the blackboard)
     94     - Snake
     95     - Robot
     96     - Scud (Sid's dog)
     97     - Lenny the Binoculars
     98     - Three Eyed Alien
     99   and additional characters from Toy Story 2, also not yet used:
    100     - Jessie (the Yodelling Cowgirl)
    101     - Zurg (the Evil Emperor)
    102     - Wheezy (the penguin)
    103     - Hannah (owner of Jessie)
    104     - Stinky Pete the Prospector (the old fat guy)
    105     - Mrs. Davis (Andy's Mom)
    106     - Barbie (the Tour Guide, probably under (c))
    107     - Mrs. Potato Head
    108     - Heimlich the Caterpillar
    109 -->
    110 <!-- (jfs) Just in case somebody misses the "What do we do when we finish
    111 with Toy Story characters" thread see:
    112 http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200207/msg01133.html
    113 I, suggested we followed with either Monster's Inc or "A Bug's life" :)
    114 -->
    115

That makes around 15 different names (just from Toy Story). Which means 
that it covers ~15 years of Debian releases (if we keep a trend of 1 per 
year which we don't at the moment). So there's no real need to have an 
uber-complex system to assign/elect names really.

Regards

Javi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: