Re: Version numbering for release DECISION!

[Chris Pressey <cpressey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:21:21 -0800 (PST)
Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> :I agree 100% that the names should indicate the _purpose_ of the
> thing :rather than its state or circumstances, simply because most
> people will :be more interested in its purpose than in other factors.
> :
> :So PRODUCTION is a better name than STABLE, DEVELOPMENT is a better
> name :than UNTESTED or CURRENT, and PREVIEW is a better name than
> WORKING. :
> :-Chris
> 
>     I don't disagree with you, but the weight of history is a
>     considerable factor here.

Agreed, especially with respect to the word RELEASE, which has taken on
a very widely accepted meaning (which has hardly anything to do with its
literal meaning, especially in an open-source context.)

I'm perfectly happy avoiding any connotation the word PRODUCTION might
have and simply sticking with RELEASE after RELEASE after RELEASE, too.

-Chris