On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I don't think it's been hatred (or passionate fighting, or else he would > have tried to reach a decision at the FPB level), but indeed, he has been > one of those who think the release name process is a waste of time and of > no use. > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2012-March/011419.html That was a very practical solution to what appeared to be another layer of hassle around release names. In reality so far at least that hassle hasn't materialized. > How many people are involved in suggesting release names, reviewing them, > checking them (Red Hat Legal)? How many people enjoy doing all that? > There aren't many voters. Part of the deal with participating in a community is that sometimes you do things you would not choose to do to enable others to do what they do choose to do. Red Hat legal can kill release names at any time by simply saying they no longer are willing to vet the names. The Fedora Board can do the same. Neither has so why do we have to keep going over this? The Board spends maybe 3-4 hours on this twice a year. If that is too much to enable part of the community to enjoy participating in the tradition of release naming then propose the Board simply stop doing it. > It has come up many years ago already, too, that hardly anybody refers to > a Fedora distribution release using its codename instead of the release > numbers and/or shortnames: Fedora 19, F19, F-19, f19. It doesn't get more > accurate. No point releases as with Red Hat Linux. And there really isn't anything accomplished by bringing up the same old arguments again now except to spoil the fun those who enjoy this might have. At least I can't see any reason. John -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
