[development] code names for core releases?
speck at blkmtn.org
Wed Sep 20 08:20:14 UTC 2006
In the past Dries has said not interested.
This discussion comes up every freeze, see archives.
See first sentence. This may have changed.
Additional comments below.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: development-bounces at drupal.org
> [mailto:development-bounces at drupal.org] On Behalf Of Khalid B
> Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 7:45 PM
> To: development at drupal.org
> Subject: Re: [development] code names for core releases?
> Let me try to rehash the process, using the next release as an
> Let us say Dries branches 5.0 a few weeks from now. The makes
> HEAD (technically trunk) open to development again.
> At that point, there is no need for 5.0 to have a code name, since
> it has a version number that will not change.
> The next release is expected to be, most probably 5.1. But it
> can be 6.0 as well depending on how much new features make
> it in before the code freeze. From 2 weeks from now until the
> code freeze (6 months or more), the "next release" has no
> definite name.
60 message thread fighting over nameing syntax of weird name generation.
Time could have ben spent on coding or QA testing.
> For that period of 6 months, the code name will be used to
> reference that release. Any references in documentation, issues,
> mailing lists, ...etc. will not reference a name (bikeshed) that
> will never again be used in the future for any other release.
Assumes 6 month release cycle. Someone will say this was an example
date. Someone else will say 'so we're going with 6 month release'... 14
message thread discussing it again.
> There would be a page on drupal.org listing release names
> and the corresponding version numbers.
Who would do this? Our Drupal version release numbers weren't explained
until I wrote the page and other then some folks updating development
pages I see very few people adding these little gems into the
handbook.... ALMOST NO ONE updating handbook pages. So not really
interested in mythical documentation load being added to some mythical
person who doesn't exist. Not to mention big discussion complaining
about how the current version isn't well explained but no one bothered
to actually do anything about that anyway.
> If some documentation still references bikeshed, and someone is
> reading that in a year or more, it is easy to know that bikeshed
> became 5.1. On the contrary, being referenced as HEAD or
> CVS or "the next release" is a name that gets reused every
See above rant about mythical non existant person getting additional
workload that doesn't have enough people as it is actually doing
> then the next release gets another unique code name (say peace
> and banana for amusement value [note, I am not advocating this,
> just a humorous example]), ...etc.
50 message thread discussing name of release and arguing over rules for
nameing. Not counting this thread.
> Note that the same is true even for Windows (e.g. Longhorn became
> Vista, Chicago became Windows 95, ...etc.). Microsoft abandoned
> release numbers after Windows 3.1 and chose year numbers, then
> cutesy marketing names. Apple and Intel use code names as well,
> although for different reasons. Examples here:
Marketing is not something we have done well off of Drupal.org. Frankly
I don't see it as something we need to do anyway. It's better left to
companies selling services... Their services. When and if our marketing
team actually produces actual marketing material you can discuss how
changing names would help market Drupal. In the mean time, no marketing
documentation has in fact been produced except by people doing it on an
ad hoc basis because no one else did and someone had to try something to
which others merely pointed fingers and complained. Charlie has had ONE
response to his post on th edoc list. So, see lack of resources in my
> I hope it is now clear why code names have value and when they
> will be used in the development cycle the most.
I hope it is clear why code names means investing in people/volunteer
resources we don't have because people who already promised they would
do stuff already don't do it.
-1 on code names.
More information about the development