The names of previous Lemmy versions were all very boring and repetetive. We need something much more creative. Any ideas?

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    35·
    8 months ago

    Eh, if someone on the team is feeling creative I don’t mind fun version numbers but semantic versioning is quite searchable and reduces confusion.

    • Shatur@lemmy.ml
      7·
      8 months ago

      One does not exclude the other. You can have a fancy name and a semantic versioning.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        6·
        8 months ago

        I think that’s the case and why I said it’s fine in my OC, but the more I think about it I’m slightly concerned it might cause some fragmentation “Does anyone know how to force a user sync in Lightfoot?” and “How can I sync users (forced) in v13.8.12?”

      • Tanoh@lemmy.world
        4·
        8 months ago

        The problem is that it is almost always just one lf them. Let’s say that v0.20 is called “Fuck Spez” and v0.21 is called “YouKnowWhatFuckMuskToo”.

        Most people are going to refer to them by either the number or the name, almost never are both used. The biggest problem with names is that they are rarely sortable (google did it with android, for a bit but not anymore), so in the future it is hard to know which is which without resorting to looking at a list of releases.

        For example, in the future when we are on v0.30 someone might say “ah, but this has been an issue since “Fuck Spez”.” And then most likely you have to look it up to know what they are talking about. If we coulld force everyone to alwaya write “version “Fuck Spez” (v0.20)” then it would be great, but that never happens.

        I personally prefer just semantic versioning for this reason.

        • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
          1·
          8 months ago

          What if the names were picked from whatever news was prominent during the release week. During last summer we could have had something like blackout or APIcalypse.

    • livus@kbin.social
      10·
      8 months ago

      This, it means sooner or later there will be a Lemmy version called Orgasmatron.

  • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
    11·
    8 months ago

    We’ve been notoriously bad about doing more frequent releases, but if we were to release every month, then naming them could get annoying really quickly.

    I’d prefer to just stay with the semantic version numbering, like a lot of projects with a ton of releases do. Like look at react’s releases.

    The fun named versioning makes sense for operating systems, that release only like once a year, but not for apps, docker services, libraries, etc.

    • nutomic@lemmy.mlOP
      3·
      8 months ago

      We only do major versions around once a year so those could still be named, while using numbers for minor versions. Lemmy is more user-facing than react, so it would make sense to have a more user-friendly versioning.

  • RedWizard [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
    121·
    8 months ago

    Hmm so you’re looking for a naming theme like the old Android scheme of Desserts or MacOS California Parks.

    List off the top of my head

    • Tree Species
    • Cities, Towns, Villages in Cuba
    • Mushroom Species
    • Names of Wildflowers

    That’s all I got for now.

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.mlEnglish
    10·
    8 months ago

    Add ridiculous titles for each version. For example. Lemmy Release v0.18.1: The Revengence

    I just think it would be funny to have “Are you still on Revengence? Make sure you update to Snickerdoodle” pop up from time to time.

  • souperk@reddthat.com
    8·
    8 months ago

    It sounds a bit too soon to use release names, especially given that Lemmy is still in alpha.

    When a major release comes out, I suggest using colony names (fictional or real), like the pirate republic.

    In general, I like names that highlight the decentralised aspect of the fediverse.

  • slazer2au@lemmy.worldEnglish
    6·
    8 months ago

    No we don’t.

    Versioning like this is good for knowing how far off you are from current.

  • grant 🍞@toast.oooEnglish
    4·
    8 months ago

    Having a name for a version would be nice for each major release (1.0.0 would have a name but 1.x.x wouldn’t, but 2.0.0 would, etc)

  • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
    3·
    8 months ago

    I like the TeX version scheme, it starts with version 3. After that it’s:
    3.1
    3.14
    3.141
    3.1415 etc. Current stable release is 3.141592653. The message is that each version is a more accurate approximation of pi. It’s not growing much bigger, but better.