[development] code names for core releases?

[Derek Wright]

On Sep 19, 2006, at 11:03 PM, Khalid B wrote:

> Case in point using Trae's Ubuntu example: they have a six month  
> release
> cycle, and their numbers are YY.MM (Year and Month). 5.10 (October
> 2005) should have been followed by 6.04 (April), but because it was  
> late
> by two months, it came out as 6.06 (June).

in that case, ubuntu just has a stupid convention for version  
numbers.  if they're going to go that far (numbers based on year,  
which is sort of cool, and supports my partially-joking proposal for  
"major.patch" version numbers), they just screwed up what the 2nd  
part should be.  it shouldn't be the month (since you don't know that  
in advance).  it should be the # of releases they did that year.  so,  
the first release in a year is always "YY.1", and the 2nd release  
should be "YY.2".  problem solved.  no "catchy" [sic] code names  
required.

-derek