Larry reads my mind over email ... Not cute, nor descriptive. A code name is just that: a code name. It should not have any hidden meaning, nor be too geeky (so it does not put off the suits), nor political, ...etc. The name should really mean nothing. I we want it to mean something then 5.0 is as good as a code name. Saying "sunflower", "damselfly" or "salamander" is enough (yeah, I had done biology in past lives, but whatever ...) It just means "the next release" with a fixed point of reference in time that everyone can tie into ... On 9/18/06, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
On Monday 18 September 2006 19:26, Earl Miles wrote:
Larry Garfield wrote:
I'm all for a cute code name scheme, but I said my piece on that back in March. :-)
Not cute, descriptive. We can pick colors for all I care. Or to be more Drupal-centric, we can pick Dutch words and misspell them. Just so we have some way to refer to versions that are currently in progress that is still meaningful when reading the message 6 months later.
Not descriptive as much as arbitrary. It's a human-readable label to refer to something. It probably shouldn't be descriptive of the version it's referencing, as that leads to confusion. Cat names, river names, city names, birds, animals that no one has ever heard of (what the hell is an eft and what's edgy about it?), etc. are all perfectly good naming schemes because they don't try to describe, just label. We describe based on that label. :-)
-- Larry Garfield AIM: LOLG42 larry@garfieldtech.com ICQ: 6817012
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it." -- Thomas Jefferson