Re: 9.6 -> 10.0

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
wrote:

> On 04/11/2016 10:35 AM, Josh berkus wrote:
>
>> On 04/11/2016 10:23 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>>> 2. Version *numbers* aren't nearly as identifiable as using names. This
>>> is something that Ubuntu has on us and something we should consider. For
>>> example, most people don't say I am running 15.10, they say, I am
>>> running Wily.
>>>
>>
>> FWIW, I regard Debian/Ubuntu names a huge barrier to adoption. They're
>> a cute "insider" thing, but confusing to new users.
>>
>
> Interesting, that isn't my experience. Even customers say, "I am running
> Precise or Trusty" and then I have to remember which version number that is.

Doesn't match my experience at all. The vast majority of my customers refer
to it by version number.

> Also, considering Ubuntu is by far the largest used Linux distro, I am not
> sure how much of that is happening in practice.
>

Also very different from my experience. Outside things like docker (which
most people don't run postgres on - yet?), redhat/centos is significantly
bigger with my customers.

Just as a point of input - clearly our customers fall in fairly
significantly different groups,and we need to be able to deal with both.

> I should note that I am not suggesting we forgo version names but adding
> something that is fun could be useful... Something to think about.
>

FWIW, I believe redhat also has such "code names". Except really *nobody*
use them there...

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/