GNOME To Start Using Codenames

[r_a_trip]

I never got this. What's the point of codenames, other than making things confusing for end-users?

Codenames are not for end users. A codename is a marker for developers. Something to make clear what is talked about when talking about (the latest) development code.

At release the codename is replaced by the version number for the benefit of end users. When you are running Ubuntu, you are running e.g. Ubuntu 14.10 or 15.04. Not Utopic Unicorn or Vivid Vervet.

For end users it is very simple, if it only has a code name, hands off, this is unfinished and potentially buggy code.

[DanL]

At release the codename is replaced by the version number for the benefit of end users. When you are running Ubuntu, you are running e.g. Ubuntu 14.10 or 15.04. Not Utopic Unicorn or Vivid Vervet.

False. The Ubuntu codename continues to be used in documentation, apt/PPA sources, bug reports, support discussion, etc.
At least Ubuntu has been going in alphabetical order for a while, so if you have the LTS codenames memorized, you can figure out the others. Debian, on the other hand... Well, let's just say I'm glad I run sid/unstable (where everything changes rapidly except for the names).

[Delgarde]

I never got this. What's the point of codenames, other than making things confusing for end-users? I understand marketing folks live in their own detached little world, and that it is easier to sell weapons of mass destruction when they don't have descriptive names ("Immoral Atomic Civilian Skin Scorcher v45.33.1" etc), but why *software*? It is very important to know which version is newer or older, especially for security reasons.

They're good for communication between developers - especially alphabetically-sequential ones like Ubuntu uses - because they're less prone to being misread than version numbers are. It's easy to see "3.16" in an email and accidentally read it as "3.19" - not so easy to see "Wombat" and misread it as "Zebra". And that can be important when developers are frequently switching between versions - working on the next release, while also doing bug fixes for the last couple of supported releases.

[eltomito]

"GNOME Ho-Chi-Minh City" - the GNOME folks totally know how to get stuff right

[curfew]

It's good for seporating the development version from the release, that way end users don't end up on a development site. It's also good if you slip a release and end up changing version numbers, i.e. what happened with PHP 6 and Ubuntu 6.04.

In Ubuntu's case their numbers are hardly "version numbers" as they are just another codename for their releases based on the release date. PHP6's case was much more complicated, as "PHP6" had been anticipated for years as the Next Big Thing and it failed, so they decided to -? again for marketing purposes -? skip 6.0 and go 7.0 so that people googling for next PHP would not be distracted by old FUD regarding something that was cancelled.

These two are rather examples of failed development management as they decided the version numbers too much upfront and then failed to provide. The solution isn't to begin using confusing and vague codenames for RELEASES but rather for DEVELOPMENT VERSIONS. "PHP-next" instead of "PHP6", "Ubuntu-next" instead of 6.06 and so on.

NOTE: This forum is broken; it cannot understand em dash characters. They were visible at the time I wrote the original message but were then replaced with spaces upon posting.

NOTE2: And of course they now appeared, after I edited and re-posted the message... But they remain visible only when prefixed with another character.

[CrystalGamma]

NOTE: This forum is broken; it cannot understand em dash characters. They were visible at the time I wrote the original message but were then replaced with spaces upon posting.

NOTE2: And of course they now appeared, after I edited and re-posted the message... But they remain visible only when prefixed with another character.

Same thing with the ellipse (...) character.