Hello, all,
Just curious but has there ever been a SuSE Linux version x.4? Seems the roadmap refers now to version 11.4 openSUSE:Roadmap - openSUSE rather than version 12.0. I can only recall ever seeing versions up to x.3. Is this something new or is this merely a euphemism for version 12.0?
I’ve looked about for news and comment on 11.4 but my searches have come to naught. Sorry if this point has been answered or announced before.
Mark
Yes. There have been SuSE Linux editions that were numbered x.4 (they were 4.4 and 6.4).
However, since the name change to openSUSE there have not been any x.4 releases…until now.
I am using SuSE since version 10.0 and to me the versioning never made sense. I am pretty sure there’s no straight concept behind it. It’s just numbers.
That’s my impression too. To be honest, I’m opposed to the way we number our releases because it confuses the marketing of our releases. So many reviews make a comment about ‘all the new features despite being a minor release!’ Now we could get upset and claim that the reviewer should know better, but really we should know better. We’ve adopted a numbering scheme that implies major and minor releases, yet we do not develop the distro along such lines.
“Tradition” is not our ally in this regard.
+1 Totally agree. It doesn’t make sense
I have never been able to make something out of the version numbering either. Yet I do know, there was some discussion going on, whether it should be 11.4 or 12.0. Today we know we’re going to have 11.4, so a decision must have been made. Maybe search the mailing lists?
heseltine wrote:
> I’ve looked about for news and comment on 11.4 but my searches have
> come to naught.
the latest milestone (TESTING quality software…not for production
use) is available for download here:
http://software.opensuse.org/developer/
questions about unreleased software are best placed and answered in
the forum for such, here:
http://forums.opensuse.org/english/get-help-here/pre-release-beta/
and, somewhere (where i can’t now find) there used to be a good mail
list to join if you wanted to participate in the testing…
maybe someone else can find it after the wiki “upgrade”.
–
DenverD
When it comes to chocolate, resistance is futile.
CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD [posted via NNTP w/openSUSE 10.3]
That would be the opensuse-factory mailing list.
I do recall 11.0 being referred to as 10.4 in early days (weeks, months) of development.
Hi, all,
Thank you for the replies. I thought perhaps they chose x.4 to allow for further development on the new video driver methodology before they advance to the next full number.
Also, I am glad there are other users who find the numbering system idiosyncratic. It would be nice if the numbering did have meaning, but the product is still superb.
Mark
Maybe it is just a necessity seen that the commercial version (SLES) has another developing cycle then the Open one and the 11.4 system allow for better sync between the two. Just a guess.
On Friday 22 October 2010 03:36, heseltine scribbled:
>
> Hi, all,
>
> Thank you for the replies. I thought perhaps they chose x.4 to allow
> for further development on the new video driver methodology before they
> advance to the next full number.
>
> Also, I am glad there are other users who find the numbering system
> idiosyncratic. It would be nice if the numbering did have meaning, but
> the product is still superb.
>
There was something hereabouts a while ago that 11.4 was chosen as an
interim step to a new numbering system incorporating the year. So, instead
of 12.0 appearing in 2011, 11.4 was chosen. The following release may be
something like 2012.0 - or not.
–
Graham Davis, Bracknell, Berks. E-mail: “newsman”, not “newsboy”.
“It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.” - Carl
Sagan
There was even a 4.4.1 which had a major fix for 4.4 included.
It’s not easy to change numbers for a major version. I think the only one that really made sense was 5.0 which made the change to RPM.
Is it ready to download, or is it beta version??
In case of doubt… read?
I figure that all these 11.x releases are just small releases.
Once a big major releases takes place then it will be 12.x release.
At least that would make sense.
If it a 6 month cycle then it should be arriving in 3 years. 12 that is.
Just to get your thought, what is in your view a “major release”. Kde 4.XXX? X-server? As it appears the rational for the numbering is a better tuning with the enterprise versions. IMO no other “hidden treasures of meaningfullness”.
No, my view was that a major implementation takes place. Other releases maybe just include minor fixes or cosmetic changes.
But i don’t know and i really don’t know how i can think of the x.1 steps from release to release.
To be honest the speed of Linux development (here included of the desktop environments) has become so lightning fast that it is really difficult to claim whatsoever new edition of a distribution is not a major change. Maybe if one takes steps as KDE3 to KDE4 as major but then, objection your honour 
why take then not the development scala of Gnome or meego… Same for file systems. Ext4 is major? Or will it be BTRFS? Or a working networkmanager in KDE4 (that would be worth an advance of two counters LOL). Probably a versioning just by calendar date will do it.
Maybe we could skip numbering all together and go with way cool and awesome release names…like
Goofy Goat
Mangy Monkey
Snappy Snail
Hurry up Hedgehog
Lazy Lion
I mean ya know animal monikers are just so in these days rotfl!
In all honesty does it really matter what number a release is?
I wouldn’t care if they started back at 1 or jumped to 83 