From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from starfish.geekisp.com ([216.168.135.166]) by linuxtogo.org with smtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UDcVj-0008Cf-LX for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:13:37 +0100 Received: (qmail 26226 invoked by uid 1003); 7 Mar 2013 14:50:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.125?) (philip@opensdr.com@96.240.188.95) by mail.geekisp.com with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 7 Mar 2013 14:50:22 -0000 Message-ID: <5138A92D.5030809@balister.org> Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 09:50:21 -0500 From: Philip Balister User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130219 Thunderbird/17.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <1362649839-9160-1-git-send-email-koen@dominion.thruhere.net> <20130307130435.GI32228@jama.dyndns-home.com> <9088096.rvOOlWx1VE@helios> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Cc: Koen Kooi , Martin Jansa , Otavio Salvador Subject: Re: [meta-kde][PATCH 3/3] README: update contributor list X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 15:13:51 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 03/07/2013 09:41 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Paul Eggleton > wrote: >> On Thursday 07 March 2013 15:03:17 Koen Kooi wrote: >>> Op 7 mrt. 2013, om 14:04 heeft Martin Jansa het >>> volgende geschreven: >>>> It would be nice to know yocto-1.4 release name in advance and name it >>>> the same as branch in oe-core/meta-oe will be (denzil, danny, ...), but >>>> I guess it can be renamed later. >>> >>> For angstrom I'm going to use 'yocto-1.4' in the branch name, I have trouble >>> remembering which names maps to which release. And the Yocto compliance >>> program talks about 1.3, .14 etc, not about codenames. >> >> Wouldn't it be worth us trying to standardise rather than all doing our own >> thing and users having to figure out what matches up between different layers? >> If others feel the same as you, then maybe we should all be using that schema. > > Or we use a codename or we don't. > > For me, codenames work fine but for users it is sometimes confusing as > the website and marketing people talk about Yocto 1.3 or 1.4 while the > involved people talk about codenames. So I find myself explaining it > over and over again. > Add me to the list of people that find codenames confusing. I can't reliably list releases in order by name. Philip