Re: naming convention question

[Dave Restall <dave.restall@mpn.cp.philips.com>]

Hi,

firstly :-

Sorry about perpetuating this thread.

Secondly :-

Thanks for a well cool system to all the people who made it possible
whatever the name is :-)

> 	I have yet to hear a developer say they are confused. In fact,
>  this is the first time I have heard *anyone* say they are
>  confused. You have, then, this dubious distinction.

This is essentially the point.  As an end user I find the names
confusing.  It would help me as an end user if instead of posters
saying :-

      "I'm using package XYZ from bilbo(or whatever the codename
      of the release is) and problem such-and-such arises"

they would say :-

	"I'm using package XYZ from the latest stable release etc.."

I use stable version 1.1.16, I do not know what it's codename is or was
and I couldn't give a flying fig to be honest.  I'm not even sure if
1.1.16 is the correct number, I'd have to check the "documentation".

>  Another criteria for code names - they should be short enough to
>  be quick and easy to type, thus minimizing typos.  IMNSHO hamm is at
>  least one letter too long.

Perhaps the name is supposed to be hmm from "hmm do you think woody is a
good name ?".

> 	An american, heh? It has some rather, ... umm.., unwholesome
>  connotations in other English speaking parts of the world.

Speaking as an Englishman, I'd never heard the term "woody" used in that
context before.  See how wonderful this list is, it not only helps you
with Debian problems but sexual problems as well, now I've got these
spots...... :-)

> 	Yup. Though of course, the general public knows stable,
>  unstable, and Debian 1.1.3, for example. You don't *have* to know the
>  names.

Exactly, therefore why have names ?  Forget I asked that :-), I can
understand the reasons for names and the like, I just have problems
dealing with them and trying to keep track of them, especially when a
name can relate to several different release numbers.  Surely the
numbers are more important than the names and with the packages being
dynamic even in 'stable' releases, then numbers assume even more
importance.

I also run 1.2 something or other which I've built via ftp (Yes I know
it take ages but I got fed up with waiting for the CD which when it did
arrive had 1.1.16 on it instead of 1.2 - but that's another story),
every fortnight or so I run dselect and download upgraded packages.
This means that I have the 'stable' release but my 'stable' release of
1.2 is possibly quite different from somebody elses 'stable' release of
1.2.  What I'm aiming at here is that names are quite meaningless and
numbers aren't that much better, however you can uniquely identify a
system using numbers, you can't using names UNLESS you release a new
name for the release whenever some package in it changes.

Cheers


Dave Restall
debian/du-970724.tx                          debian-user@lists.debian.org
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Dave Restall                                dave.restall@mpn.cp.philips.com +
+                                             Tel +31 (0) 40 2756438          +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .