FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 09-06-2010, 03:27 PM
"M.R."
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

On 09/06/2010 01:45 PM, Gurus Knugum wrote:
> There is no 10.4 version of Ubuntu. Current version is 10.04 and next
> version will be 10.10. If we skip the zeroes, it will be a bit confusing
> since 10.4 in that case is released before 10.1…
To me, 10.4 and 10.04 is the same. In case of Ubuntu version numbers,
"4" (or "04" if we are to follow the vendor's style) denotes month of
April. If anything, those that for reasons best known to themselves
decided that a month ordinal number should be written with a leading
zero are probably the first to deserve some criticism. But it hardly
matters...

mr


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 09-06-2010, 03:44 PM
"Gurus Knugum"
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

Den 2010-09-06 17:27:57 skrev M.R. <makrober@gmail.com>:

> On 09/06/2010 01:45 PM, Gurus Knugum wrote:
>> There is no 10.4 version of Ubuntu. Current version is 10.04 and next
>> version will be 10.10. If we skip the zeroes, it will be a bit confusing
>> since 10.4 in that case is released before 10.1…
> To me, 10.4 and 10.04 is the same.

Well, as long as you only write to yourself I don't mind.

> In case of Ubuntu version numbers,
> "4" (or "04" if we are to follow the vendor's style) denotes month of
> April. If anything, those that for reasons best known to themselves
> decided that a month ordinal number should be written with a leading
> zero are probably the first to deserve some criticism. But it hardly
> matters...

Personally I would have preferred if the numbers looked something like
this: 2010.1 → 2010.2 → 2011.1 and so on. Or maybe 2010.0 → 2010.1 →
2011.0 and so on. But now they don't, and no matter how stupid it is, I'll
follow it anyway. I mean, I can see some things in the English language
that could be ”better”, but I still try to follow the ”rules” the best I
can (not very good, but at least I try – English is not my native
language) and not replace them by my own rules.


--
Kind regards

Johnny Rosenberg

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 09-06-2010, 04:07 PM
Rashkae
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

M.R. wrote:

> To me, 10.4 and 10.04 is the same. In case of Ubuntu version numbers,
> "4" (or "04" if we are to follow the vendor's style) denotes month of
> April. If anything, those that for reasons best known to themselves
> decided that a month ordinal number should be written with a leading
> zero are probably the first to deserve some criticism. But it hardly
> matters...
>
> mr
>
>

No, it really matters. Ubuntu people know that the numbers used for
versions are chosen based on date of release, but that's not in any way
a convention. For the rest of the world, the higher the version number,
the newer the release.

10.4 > 10.1 > 10.04 You see? If you refer to 10.04 as 10.4, you are
implying it's a newer release than 10.10



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 09-06-2010, 04:35 PM
ms
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

On 06/09/10 17:07, Rashkae wrote:
> M.R. wrote:
>
>> To me, 10.4 and 10.04 is the same. In case of Ubuntu version numbers,
>> "4" (or "04" if we are to follow the vendor's style) denotes month of
>> April. If anything, those that for reasons best known to themselves
>> decided that a month ordinal number should be written with a leading
>> zero are probably the first to deserve some criticism. But it hardly
>> matters...
>>
>> mr
>>
>>
>
> No, it really matters. Ubuntu people know that the numbers used for
> versions are chosen based on date of release, but that's not in any way
> a convention. For the rest of the world, the higher the version number,
> the newer the release.
>
> 10.4> 10.1> 10.04 You see? If you refer to 10.04 as 10.4, you are
> implying it's a newer release than 10.10

The confusion arises because they use a dot to separate year and month,
creating the misconception that they are "classical" release numbers.
They should write it down 10/4, 10/10, 11/4 , that is, like *dates*,
because that's what they are.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 09-06-2010, 10:05 PM
"Gurus Knugum"
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

Den 2010-09-06 18:35:05 skrev ms <devicerandom@gmail.com>:

> On 06/09/10 17:07, Rashkae wrote:
>> M.R. wrote:
>>
>>> To me, 10.4 and 10.04 is the same. In case of Ubuntu version numbers,
>>> "4" (or "04" if we are to follow the vendor's style) denotes month of
>>> April. If anything, those that for reasons best known to themselves
>>> decided that a month ordinal number should be written with a leading
>>> zero are probably the first to deserve some criticism. But it hardly
>>> matters...
>>>
>>> mr
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No, it really matters. Ubuntu people know that the numbers used for
>> versions are chosen based on date of release, but that's not in any way
>> a convention. For the rest of the world, the higher the version number,
>> the newer the release.
>>
>> 10.4> 10.1> 10.04 You see? If you refer to 10.04 as 10.4, you are
>> implying it's a newer release than 10.10
>
> The confusion arises because they use a dot to separate year and month,
> creating the misconception that they are "classical" release numbers.
> They should write it down 10/4, 10/10, 11/4 , that is, like *dates*,
> because that's what they are.
>
>
In that case they should follow the ISO-6801 date format, that is
YYYY-MM-DD (or in this case only YYYY-DD or YY-DD), which in these cases
will be 10-04, 10-10 and 11-04. But 2010-04 is more obvious and easier to
understand.

--
Kind regards

Johnny Rosenberg

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 09-06-2010, 10:57 PM
ms
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

On 06/09/10 23:05, Gurus Knugum wrote:
>
>> The confusion arises because they use a dot to separate year and month,
>> creating the misconception that they are "classical" release numbers.
>> They should write it down 10/4, 10/10, 11/4 , that is, like *dates*,
>> because that's what they are.
>>
>>
> In that case they should follow the ISO-6801 date format, that is
> YYYY-MM-DD (or in this case only YYYY-DD or YY-DD), which in these cases
> will be 10-04, 10-10 and 11-04. But 2010-04 is more obvious and easier to
> understand.

Well, no need of being to enforce an ISO format necessarily for such a
trivial matter , but yes, anything would be better than the dot
separator. 2010-04 seems to me the best thing (and could be written
2010-4 without being misleading).



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 09-07-2010, 12:22 AM
Rashkae
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

ms wrote:

> Well, no need of being to enforce an ISO format necessarily for such a
> trivial matter , but yes, anything would be better than the dot
> separator. 2010-04 seems to me the best thing (and could be written
> 2010-4 without being misleading).

I think you're entirely too focused on the date... At the end of the the
day, it's a Version number, not a svn snapshot. If it bothers you, just
forget that it has any connection to date whatsoever, and you'll have a
better understanding of it.






--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 09-07-2010, 12:30 AM
Johnneylee Rollins
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 3:57 PM, ms <devicerandom@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/09/10 23:05, Gurus Knugum wrote:
>>
>>> The confusion arises because they use a dot to separate year and month,
>>> creating the misconception that they are "classical" release numbers.
>>> They should write it down 10/4, 10/10, 11/4 , that is, like *dates*,
>>> because that's what they are.
>>>
>>>
>> In that case they should follow the ISO-6801 date format, that is
>> YYYY-MM-DD (or in this case only YYYY-DD or YY-DD), which in these cases
>> will be 10-04, 10-10 and 11-04. But 2010-04 is more obvious and easier to
>> understand.
>
> Well, no need of being to enforce an ISO format necessarily for such a
> trivial matter , but yes, anything would be better than the dot
> separator. 2010-04 seems to me the best thing (and could be written
> 2010-4 without being misleading).
>
We all tend to forget this crucial point: It's Mark Shuttleworth's toy
that he is letting us use. He could use the number of times he's gone
to the bathroom since the last major release as the version number.
Just for clarity in communication, learn the damn system or use his
childish animal code names.

Although, I will call Jaunty the last really Orange release.
~SpaceGhost
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 09-07-2010, 02:11 PM
ms
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

On 07/09/10 01:30, Johnneylee Rollins wrote:
> We all tend to forget this crucial point: It's Mark Shuttleworth's toy
> that he is letting us use. He could use the number of times he's gone
> to the bathroom since the last major release as the version number.
> Just for clarity in communication, learn the damn system or use his
> childish animal code names.

We forget this point because it's wrong. Ubuntu is the result of its
community working on it, not of Shuttleworth only.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 09-07-2010, 05:36 PM
Johnneylee Rollins
 
Default OT: 10.4 or 10.04

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:11 AM, ms <devicerandom@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 07/09/10 01:30, Johnneylee Rollins wrote:
>> We all tend to forget this crucial point: It's Mark Shuttleworth's toy
>> that he is letting us use. He could use the number of times he's gone
>> to the bathroom since the last major release as the version number.
>> Just for clarity in communication, learn the damn system or use his
>> childish animal code names.
>
> We forget this point because it's wrong. Ubuntu is the result of its
> community working on it, not of Shuttleworth only

Haha, you're delusional.

~SpaceGhost
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:23 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org