Talk:2008 Debate of Build and Release
 Put in your comments
~~~~to sign your comments and questions.
CharlesMerriam 06:42, 5 April 2008 (EDT)
 Summary of devel naming thread.
The actual naming of "update 1" has created a long thread on the devel mailing list. This thread shows the expected friction between time based release names and function based release names. Following the "Can't tell your players without a program" rule, here's a short summary:
 Summary of devel thread to 8 Apr 2008
- Micheal stone: no problem
- Andres Salomon: hmm. Apple Blueberry (named alphabetical)
- Gary Martin: No, official-703.. No to OLPC2 thats hardware
- Dennis Gilmore: OLPC2. Oh, an the next hardware is XO-2 and should
- have same releases.
- Simon: 802.month or 802.season to push exact time. OLPC-2 type
naming for feature based.
- Morgan: use internal names without exact ship times in case we missed.
- Arron Konstom: outward consistency counts. No update-1-703, even if
we did it before. Actually <hardware version>.<major software>.<minor software> is best.
- Walter Bender: Seasons are out. Feature based naming will slip.
XO-2 is hardware. OLPC-2, er Sugar-2, maybe OLPC-Fedora 1 is software. Names are hard. We will ship based on time.
- Paul Fox: OLPC doesn't sound like software. Start with high numbers.
- Tomeu Vizoso: Sugar sounds like software.
- Kent Loobey: Schools really want predictable dates. Let's use
solstices which aren't.
- Polychronis Ypodimatopoulos: Prefixes shouldn't get tooooo long.
- Richard Smith: How about feature based? <hardware version>.<major
- Mitch Bradley: What are we releasing? OLPC <component> <Generation> <Ordinal>
- Jim Gettys: Note that OS protocol changes may or may not change all
- Martin Langoff: Feature based, <major software (API)>.<minor
software (Stability)>.<bugfix> - <country>, with some interaction with ISO numbers. Let's start with 0. something since the API isn't stable.
- Mitch Bradley: Feature based with letters, .10 doesn't work too well.
- Morgan Collect: Right 7.10 is said as "7.1" and 7.04 and "7"
- Charles Merriam: Use <OLPC or creator> <component> <year> <major revision>:<minor revision> [- <special build>]
 Two competing naming themes
 Option 1: Functional naming
- Use: some version of <component name> <major (API) version> . <minor (patch) version>
- no consensus on how to designate special builds; patch number versus suffix.
- no discussion on how much constitutes a "major" API change.
 Option 2: Naming incorporating a year
- Still my minority view. It is listed as the minimum buy-in before I work seriously on a build system.
- I'm adding it the main page as additional specification.