Plasma naming scheme

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Saturday, January 03, 2015 18:23:07 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> while writing up a vision for Plasma interaction, the VDG noticed that it
> was  unclear exactly what terms to use when referring to Plasma Desktop
> specifically, so we thought it would make sense to clarify this.
> 
> Therefore, we went ahead and drafted some communication guidelines I'd like
> to  present for discussion:
> 
> - When talking about the the Plasma technology generically, use only
> "Plasma",  omitting the "5" as that is just an iteration of Plasma.
> 
> - When talking about a particular version of the technology, but not a 
> specific shell, use "Plasma [version]" e.g. "Plasma 5.1".
> 
> - When talking about the a specific shell but not about a specific version, 
> use "Plasma [shell], e.g. "Plasma Desktop"
> 
> - When talking about a specific shell in a particular version, use  "Plasma 
> [version] [shell]" e.g. "Plasma 5.2 Desktop", "Plasma 5.4 Active"
> 
> For example in release announcement we'd talk about the Plasma 5.2 release
> and  when there are shell specific changes we could write "Plasma Desktop
> now has addition X"
> 
> Does that make sense to everyone? And if so: Where should we publish it and 
> where should we announce it?

This nomenclature sounds fine to my ears. Does this need announcement? I think 
the Dot editors have some wiki pages with these things, but other than that, 
to my biased self, this is common knowledge / common sense?

Cheers,
-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9