• @FooBarrington
    link
    3
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Hm… Has anyone ever suggested they just do both? Wouldn’t that be amazing.

    Though I would prefer a naming scheme like Ubuntu, with the first letter incrementing. That would be more useful than the current names.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      12 days ago

      That only matters if you track every release. I think. I can’t even tell. The main releases sure don’t just increment through the alphabet.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 day ago

          My alphabet doesn’t go F, J, N, O.
          The page you linked has multiple tables and you need to refer to all of them to find the incremental alphabet mentioned above.
          Is it April in an even-numbered year? That’s an LTS and will be releasing sub-versions under the same name for twelve years.
          Is it April in an odd-numbered year? That’s a leapfrog fifteen-month release with no extended support.
          Is it October of any year? Eight months support, used as a preview/testing ground/stopgap for the following April’s big/small release (depending on the even/odd rule).
          Most people are only ever going to see Focal and Jammy and Noble.

          • @FooBarrington
            link
            11 day ago

            Okay? Not sure what you’re on about. Somehow only LTS versions count for you, yet those are also not okay because updates are published over time?

            I don’t understand your issue.

              • @FooBarrington
                link
                01 day ago

                It obviously offers advantages since it’s an ordinal scale. Why would you pretend it doesn’t. How did the names hurt you?