On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:00:58PM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 04/19/2012 07:04 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >This cycle, the Board is also asking contributors to let us know if we > >should continue to have release names for future Fedora releases. Even > >though the interface is the same, this portion is intended to be a poll > >rather than a straight up vote. The Fedora Board will look at the answers > >to determine if enough contributors value continuing to create release names > >to make it worthwhile in the future. If it does seem desirable, the Board > >will likely look into forming a working group to come up with a new method > >for creating release names for future releases. > > It would be nice to have a third option: > -Change release names to release theme. > > We don't really need a name (IMO), but the theme adds a nice touch. > What would that look like? Scenario 1: Fedora 21 The desktop wallpaper and other graphical elements have a common theme, for instance, blackjack. - I would say this would be a vote to stop using release names and let the design team decide how they want to theme the release Scenario 2: Fedora 21 The theme here is Las Vegas Fedora 22 The theme here is Paris Fedora 23 The theme here is Buenos Aires - The overall theme for Fedora releases are cities and every release has a different one. -- if we dont spell out the name in the release, I think this would be a vote to stop using release names and let the design team (and possibly ambassadors, docs, marketing) work out choosing new themes. - If we do make the city chosen explicit its likely a vote to keep release names (although it might be debatable if it isn't actually named after those cities) and the idea of keeping a common theme would be discussed and chosen when we revamp the process. Some other Scenario? Originally we considered having three questions: * keep release naming the way it is. * Keep release names but change the process. * Discard release names altogether. After discussion in the Board meeting, it was decided to go with two questions instead for the following reasons: * Three questions with range voting was seen as hard to understand. * Most people on the mailing list were against the current release naming procedure even if they were for some sort of release name -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpjqHHol44D9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
