Re: Name suggestion
> I think it should go broken -> unstable -> frozen -> stable. It would
> seem to me that unstable -> broken represents a backwards move.
I disagree. The unstable distribution is not necessarily broken. The
frozen distribution _is_ broken most of the time, otherwise it would be
the stable one; the only reason not to make the frozen distro stable
yet is usually a number of bugs. I really think `broken' is much
clearer to potential users. Therefore I would prefer the name `broken'
to `frozen'. But I think there is another stage that might earn its own
name: if the distro has only just become stable, usually some
installation issues have to be ironed out. I propose to call this the
`tender' distribution. It should then go `stable' after the official CD
has proven to work `in the wild'. While the unstable distribution
becomes broken, the stable one has reached a stadium that we could
proudly call `robust'.
unstable -> broken -> tender -> stable -> robust
I feel this scheme might benefit from some refinement, but I suppose it
could do for the time being.
Eric
--
E.L. Meijer (tgakem@chem.tue.nl) | tel. office +31 40 2472189
Eindhoven Univ. of Technology | tel. lab. +31 40 2475032
Lab. for Catalysis and Inorg. Chem. (TAK) | tel. fax +31 40 2455054
Reply to: