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@bga.com wrote:
From: Mikus Grinbergs mikus@bga.com Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: New F11 XO-1build 115 Paraguay To: "Bernie Innocenti" bernie@codewiz.org Cc: "OLPC Devel" devel@lists.laptop.org, "Fedora OLPC List" fedora-olpc-list@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@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/olpc