Plasma Next Naming

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Saturday 18 January 2014 15:53:16 Mark Gaiser wrote:

> I don't see anything wrong with naming the next plasma as just "Plasma
> 2". and subsequent releases should follow the name: "Plasma
> 2.<update>" so "Plasma 2.1". There is nothing wrong with that. It
> works for tons of software out there including the Linux kernel.
> Changing to something more fancy adds exactly nothing.
> So i disagree and judging from the responses thus far it seems like
> it's going to happen anyway. That leaves me to the known phrase: "if
> you can't beat them, join them".

Code names aside, this would still mean that we'd have a progression from 
Plasma 4.11 (nobody outside KDE calls it "Plasma 1") to Plasma 2, which at 
least I would not be able to properly explain to anyone.
Changing the numbering scheme would clearly indicate that the next plasma 
version is not just the next iteration after 4.11, but something different 
altogether.