Plasma Next Naming

[Martin Graesslin]

On Saturday 18 January 2014 21:53:55 Valorie Zimmerman wrote:
> 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."

we also discussed the option of "Plasma 5". We had some supporters of calling 
it that way and also very vocal opponents (/me raises hand). I fear that if we 
call it "5" it will end as "KDE 5" in media and with users. If we change the 
version pattern completely people might finally get the idea (especially if 
applications keep with version numbers).

But of course the main idea behind the version pattern change to a date based 
version number is to add more information to it. The main problem with version 
numbers is that they don't carry any information and nobody knows how old that 
version actually is. For our own releases we know it because we can do math. 
So we know that 4.8 is two years old as we currently have 4.12 and it's four 
releases away. But if one looks at a more global scheme that information is 
just not there. How old is Firefox 15 or Chrome 12 or Linux 2.6.32? A date 
based scheme helps there.

Cheers
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/plasma-devel/attachments/20140119/b2b6d028/attachment.sig>