I'll go with Mikus on that.
With at least 3 development streams some qualifier is needed in the naming. eg
os115x1/os115x15/os115py
--- On Fri, 3/26/10, Mikus Grinbergs <mikus(a)bga.com> wrote:
From: Mikus Grinbergs <mikus(a)bga.com>
Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: New F11 XO-1build 115 Paraguay
To: "Bernie Innocenti" <bernie(a)codewiz.org>
Cc: "OLPC Devel" <devel(a)lists.laptop.org>, "Fedora OLPC List"
<fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com>
Date: Friday, March 26, 2010, 7:38 PM
In my opinion, the name selected for
this Paraguay build can create
quite a bit of confusion.
It used to be possible to distinguish within current
development of
F11-based builds by their naming -- 11 (or thereabouts)
from Parrish for
the XO-1, 67 (or thereabouts) from Innocenti for the XO-1,
116 (or
thereabouts) from Ball for the XO-1.5. [64 and 200
were signed - so
somewhat "outsiders".]
Now every mention of "115" will have to be qualified "-- I
mean the one
focused for Paraguay"" versus "-- I mean the one for
general XO-1.5
testing".
Bah, mikus
_______________________________________________
olpc mailing list
olpc(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/olpc