Plasma Next Naming

[Valorie Zimmerman]

On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer <colomar at autistici.org> wrote:
> 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.

Has the "Plasma 5" idea been dropped entirely? That jump in numbering
would show "something different altogether" and we could still do
"Plasma 5 by KDE."

And if the plasma devels want to call it "Angelfish" among themselves,
I think that's cool. Anglerfish are pretty cool too, and are sorta
meta.

Valorie

-- 
http://about.me/valoriez