Name that Tree!
jkeating at redhat.com
Sun Feb 14 16:24:31 UTC 2010
On Sun, 2010-02-14 at 07:54 -0800, John Poelstra wrote:
> I don't see the awkwardness either.
> I see it adding simplicity which is what we need vs. another name we
> have to explain to people less involved in the development/release
> process: what it is, if they should use it, etc.
> Here is a draft diagram I have explaining what the trees and repos look
> like. I don't think we need an additional label or name as the picture
> illustrates or see what we gain.
How do you easily answer the question "What state is Fedora 13 in right
We can say "It's in rawhide still", we can say "It's released", what we
don't have is what it is between those two. We could potentially use
"It's in Alpha, it's in Beta, it's in RC" but that's a lot of names for
the same kind of thing. "It's branched" kind of works, but not really.
Maybe this is less of a name for a tree, and more of a name for at
tree /state/. The tree is Fedora 13, the /state/ would be <term>.
Think of every place we used the term "Pending" during our FAD on
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100214/c5d22770/attachment.bin
More information about the devel