[Sugar-devel] RFC: Make Sugar 0.102 = Sugar 1.0[ Sugar-devel Digest, Vol 61, Issue 43]

[Daniel Narvaez]

I agree with you about major.minor, with major being the marketing version
and minor the developers one. Did I get that right? Does anyone disagree?

What I'm not sure to understand is which major number you would like to be
used for the next release. To make it easier let's say we are currently v2
as Yioryos suggested. My understanding is that

* If it's a release we can PR, developers will call it 3.102, marketing 3
 + some name.
* if we cannot PR it, developers will call it 2.103, marketing... just
won't call it :)

Is that correct?

On Thursday, 7 November 2013, Sean DALY wrote:

> cc'ing marketing for... a marketing issue
>
> Nope, the GTK3 change just passed under the radar. As stated previously I
> lobbied for a v1 six years ago which is why we are ready for a v2. Or even
> a v3.
>
> For building a PR story I can work with v2 or v3, just not v1.
>
> The issue with 2.2, 2.4 is that from a marketing perspective we get boxed
> into a major number step timeframe irrespective of marketing needs. A major
> number change should ideally happen when it's ready, or when we need to
> communicate a major shift. I still think associating the existing numbering
> behind a major number (e.g. 2.102) keeps continuity. PR will communicate
> the major number, probably with a name. And not an unmarketable obscure
> name, either.
>
> Sean
> Sugar Labs Marketing Coordinator
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'dwnarvaez at gmail.com');>
> > wrote:
>
>> Hmm I suppose the 1.x -> 2.x switch would have not made sense to
>> marketing because there wasn't major user visible changes?
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, 7 November 2013, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> For sugar developers their is certainly a continuation in development
>>> and the current numbering makes a lot of sense.
>>> However, looking from outside 0.102 should be Sugar 3.x where  1.x is
>>> the original, 2.x is the Gtk3/introspection move and now the html5/jc
>>> (online/ultrabook/tablet) version.
>>> If you actually consider 0.100 as 3.0 then it can go 3.2, 3.4 etc to
>>> keep up with current numbering.
>>> Should make marketing happy with minimal disruption.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Narvaez
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
>> 'Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org');>
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
>>
>

-- 
Daniel Narvaez
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20131107/44f0c9f0/attachment.html>