Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codenames

David Nalley david at
Fri Mar 23 14:30:33 UTC 2012

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:24 AM, seth vidal <skvidal at> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:14:36 -0400 (EDT)
> Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik at> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> there's ongoing discussion about the connotation analysis
>> of Fedora Project code names (so not only for Fedora itself
>> but other sub-projects too) started by Rajesh Ranjan (thanks
>> for ticket!).
>> It's a right time to get an input from community as there's
>> currently running Fedora 18 codename process [1].
>> As Rajesh posted to Fedora Board Track ticket, connotation is
>> "the emotional and imaginative association for a word, where
>> denotation is the strict dictionary meaning of a word."
>> Current process for selecting next code name is - community
>> members suggests the name, there's publicly accessible list for
>> everyone, then Board goes through the suggested names list to
>> remove the clear examples of names breaking the policy (yeah,
>> usually it's one search term in Google to find out the name has
>> to be ruled out, but that's Board deal ;-) and this list is
>> sent to Red Hat legal for proper legal review. Then the voting
>> is opened for everyone with valid FAS account and only names
>> that passed the process are allowed.
>> In Fedora we believe in freedom and openness, we don't have to
>> stick to the strict "corporate-like| rules but on the other hand we
>> should respect our community and we don't want to offend anyone
>> consciously.
>> Usually, we use the common sense to rule out offending stuff but
>> also we (and Board neither) don't  have a degree in sociology,
>> politics, religion and our geek culture is also from the another
>> universe :).
>> As I already pointed out - the process is open. Anybody can step
>> into in the early phase of naming selection and comment the
>> potential problems. And I believe the Board members will think
>> about the concerns raised (at least me ;-).
>> So personally I'd like to avoid any strict rule/policy as it could
>> hurt our community, we don't have a proper set of skills to do
>> the full analysis during the Board turn and I really hope with help
>> provided by community we  can avoid the naming problems in the
>> future - just we need your, community, input.
>> Any thoughts?
> I think we should drop the naming process altogether.
> For the following reasons:
> 1. the names do not serve any use
> 2. the names are a waste of time and effort to administer the process
> 3. no one remembers the names.
> 4. the names are potentially divisive.
> Let's do away with naming releases altogether and side step this entire
> issue.
> Thanks,
> -sv

To add one more justification there:

5. Now that we've had Zod and Beefy Miracle - is there really any
point continuing? (yes I know, Bacon, but that's very unlikely to be


More information about the advisory-board mailing list