The names of previous Lemmy versions were all very boring and repetetive. We need something much more creative. Any ideas?
Motörhead had 23 studio albums.
Based on classification? Taken from a Wikipedia article concerning lemmings.
We’ve been notoriously bad about doing more frequent releases, but if we were to release every month, then naming them could get annoying really quickly.
I’d prefer to just stay with the semantic version numbering, like a lot of projects with a ton of releases do. Like look at react’s releases.
The fun named versioning makes sense for operating systems, that release only like once a year, but not for apps, docker services, libraries, etc.
We only do major versions around once a year so those could still be named, while using numbers for minor versions. Lemmy is more user-facing than react, so it would make sense to have a more user-friendly versioning.
I’d be good with that.
So are you saying we are gonna get monthly updates 👀👀
I’d like that, we just have to be more disciplined about not adding breaking changes too often.
Take your time
Call the next one Final and the one after that Final.Final
- goddamn.final
- truly.final
- final.i.swear
- final.ffs
- no.more.revision
- no.more.revision.please
- no.more.goddamn.revision
- no.more.fcken.revisiom
- no.more.revision.ffs
Just use track titles of Motörhead. Major release could have album titles.
Eh, if someone on the team is feeling creative I don’t mind fun version numbers but semantic versioning is quite searchable and reduces confusion.
One does not exclude the other. You can have a fancy name and a semantic versioning.
The problem is that it is almost always just one lf them. Let’s say that v0.20 is called “Fuck Spez” and v0.21 is called “YouKnowWhatFuckMuskToo”.
Most people are going to refer to them by either the number or the name, almost never are both used. The biggest problem with names is that they are rarely sortable (google did it with android, for a bit but not anymore), so in the future it is hard to know which is which without resorting to looking at a list of releases.
For example, in the future when we are on v0.30 someone might say “ah, but this has been an issue since “Fuck Spez”.” And then most likely you have to look it up to know what they are talking about. If we coulld force everyone to alwaya write “version “Fuck Spez” (v0.20)” then it would be great, but that never happens.
I personally prefer just semantic versioning for this reason.
What if the names were picked from whatever news was prominent during the release week. During last summer we could have had something like blackout or APIcalypse.
Hmm so you’re looking for a naming theme like the old Android scheme of Desserts or MacOS California Parks.
List off the top of my head
- Tree Species
- Cities, Towns, Villages in Cuba
- Mushroom Species
- Names of Wildflowers
That’s all I got for now.
I like the TeX version scheme, it starts with version 3. After that it’s:
3.1
3.14
3.141
3.1415 etc. Current stable release is 3.141592653. The message is that each version is a more accurate approximation of pi. It’s not growing much bigger, but better.This is fun but also incredibly awful
It’s software versioning, not a new breakfast cereal
Books of the Bible, Torah and Koran
The amount of controversy it would generate would propel Lemmy into international headlines.
or chapters from “Das Capital”
