The Core Problem with Parrot Version Numbers

[Andrew Whitworth]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:19 PM, chromatic <chromatic at wgz.org> wrote:
> One drawback of raw year numbers is that it doesn't encode the biannual
> release structure.  The more numbers and letters you stick with a scheme, the
> harder it is to parse out meaning (and disambiguate between them).
>
> I understand the disappeal of the whimsical naming scheme, but it *does* have
> a lot going for it in the mnemonic sense.  You could explain it to a third
> grader, for example.

I don't dislike the whimsical naming scheme, I actually like it very
much. I just hope we beat Ubuntu to X so we can get dibs on
"xylophone" which everybody knows is the only good X-word.

My only point was that for the detractors, a whimsical naming scheme
isn't the only possible one that moves us away from X.Y.Z and
potentially includes the small amount of information we do need to
convey. Something that does use the year instead of a random name does
have the benefit that it could be made fixed-width and therefore
easily usable in things like bytecode. Not that this is a huge selling
point.

--Andrew Whitworth