Better Name for "0710"?

[Matthew]

LMCE "0710" is now being beta tested, and release is imminent. It's called "0710" because it's based on Ubuntu 0710. But the Ubuntu version is named that because it was released in "2007/10" (October 2007), which satisfies both incremental version numbers and recalls just when it dates from. This new version of LMCE will not be released until 2008, and it's different from the previous version more because of LMCE project work than from upgrades in the underlying Ubuntu OS.

So maybe we shouldn't call it "0710", which names the version after both a date and a component that don't define it. Maybe LMCE should do what Ubuntu does, and name the release after the date it's actually released, padded with zeroes. In a year or so, a name like "0801" will mean a lot more than "0710".

[mortar]

You make a good point, but if they're still going to offer a CD installation method at some point, The multiple version numbers are going to get confusing for some people, and they won't know which version of Ubuntu to have loaded and may install 8.04 by mistake.

Perhaps the versions could be released as LMCE "0710.0810", with the minor version referencing the date (which is just a mouthful).  Judging by the staggered history of LinuxMCE releases, I think it'll be fine to call it "0710", as I imagine the devs will eventually get it to the point where LinuxMCE versions are released a certain number of days (i.e. a month) after, or to co-incide with a Ubuntu release as I'm sure was their aim.

[Matthew]

You make a good point, but if they're still going to offer a CD installation method at some point, The multiple version numbers are going to get confusing for some people, and they won't know which version of Ubuntu to have loaded and may install 8.04 by mistake.

Perhaps the versions could be released as LMCE "0710.0810", with the minor version referencing the date (which is just a mouthful).  Judging by the staggered history of LinuxMCE releases, I think it'll be fine to call it "0710", as I imagine the devs will eventually get it to the point where LinuxMCE versions are released a certain number of days (i.e. a month) after, or to co-incide with a Ubuntu release as I'm sure was their aim.

I know what you mean about the name referencing the Ubuntu version. But there's no reason the LMCE version has to reference the Ubuntu version. In fact, unless LMCE starts exceeding the Ubuntu 6 month release cycle, which I doubt, the Ubuntu name tells you to install it on top of the most recent Ubuntu to the LMCE date name. In fact, if LMCE ever releases a version that isn't compatible with its most recent version of Ubuntu (or whichever distro it's based on), then it's got serious problems that would demand a fork that could keep up.

[totallymaxed]

LMCE "0710" is now being beta tested, and release is imminent. It's called "0710" because it's based on Ubuntu 0710. But the Ubuntu version is named that because it was released in "2007/10" (October 2007), which satisfies both incremental version numbers and recalls just when it dates from. This new version of LMCE will not be released until 2008, and it's different from the previous version more because of LMCE project work than from upgrades in the underlying Ubuntu OS.

So maybe we shouldn't call it "0710", which names the version after both a date and a component that don't define it. Maybe LMCE should do what Ubuntu does, and name the release after the date it's actually released, padded with zeroes. In a year or so, a name like "0801" will mean a lot more than "0710".

Hmmm... it seems to me that we have a perfectly good naming scheme already ;-)

[ddamron]

Totallymaxed,

I agree... no need to change what works.

[djmaze]

Well since it is based on Ubuntu you maybe should keep your own version but use Ubuntu's versioning as the release (or build) number?

Say: 1.2.0710

Then in the case if ther are no changes in LMCE you can still upgrade ubuntu and get: 1.2.0804
Or in the reverse case: 1.3.0710

This does "feels" better to the "old school" versioning system (major.minor.release.build)

[edit]
Also it would be odd if the exact same sources from 710 are used.
Maybe Ubuntu had important updates/patches in the mean time.
Then you can't fully say it is 710 but, 712 instead
[/edit]