On Sun, 2010-02-14 at 07:54 -0800, John Poelstra wrote: > I don't see the awkwardness either. > > I see it adding simplicity which is what we need vs. another name we > have to explain to people less involved in the development/release > process: what it is, if they should use it, etc. > > Here is a draft diagram I have explaining what the trees and repos look > like. I don't think we need an additional label or name as the picture > illustrates or see what we gain. > > http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/paste-bin/nfr-diagram-v2.pdf How do you easily answer the question "What state is Fedora 13 in right now?" We can say "It's in rawhide still", we can say "It's released", what we don't have is what it is between those two. We could potentially use "It's in Alpha, it's in Beta, it's in RC" but that's a lot of names for the same kind of thing. "It's branched" kind of works, but not really. Maybe this is less of a name for a tree, and more of a name for at tree /state/. The tree is Fedora 13, the /state/ would be <term>. Think of every place we used the term "Pending" during our FAD on Friday. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
