

Fedora Release Name process ended - Akhilan
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2013-October/012209.html

======
na85
Good. The last handful of release names were moronic, and the number of
person-hours wasted debating the merits of the various names in IRC and on
mailing lists was staggering.

~~~
esteb_li
I think it wasn't always bad. It gave personality to projects. But I agree
with you that it's time to move on.

------
dijit
Fedora naming convention was always a bit strange.

we went from Sulfur, Cambridge, Leonidas and Constantine (examples)

to Beefy Miracle, Spherical Cow... and... Heisenbug..

the previous names seem stronger to me for some reason.

~~~
nwh
No stranger than a very popular distro that uses names from Toy Story for its
releases.

~~~
jlgaddis
FWIW, there is at least a "method to the madness" behind the naming of Debian
releases. Fedora and Ubuntu, for example, seem to come up with names at
random.

~~~
skywhopper
For Ubuntu, each release uses the next letter of the alphabet. And the names
are chosen by Mark Shuttleworth, who writes up an explanation of each one.

The adjectives used also indicate the mission of that particular release--the
LTS releases' names have attempted to indicate their relative stability:
Dapper, Hardy, Lucid, Precise, and Trusty. Whereas the intermediate releases
which debut new ideas and tools have names that indicate their freer status:
Edgy, Maverick, Raring, Jaunty, Feisty.

Silly it may be. Pointless? Definitely. But random it is not.

~~~
jgeorge
I had no idea there was actually "logic" to the naming. Thanks.

Still stupid names, but at least with a goal in mind.

------
BrownBuffalo
Can someone please get me inline with why we have Fedora in comparison to the
CentOS community? It seems as if CentOS was more inline with the Redhat
commercial enterprise edition. I've been a Mac user for a while, so my Unix
has be branded on Darwin vs. others - so this seems like a legit place to get
the difference nailed down. Thanks!

~~~
FireBeyond
CentOS is a clone of RHEL - there is work involved in running the build
systems, mirrors, de-branding and such. It is intended for those who want to
use RHEL - personally, non-profit, etc., who just cannot justify the support
licensing of RHEL.

Fedora, on the other hand, is Red Hat’s “next generation”. Software packages
have a change to mature, be soundly tested and stabilify there before being
introduced to RHEL, to give those “enterprise” users a fair degree of security
on system stability, at the expense of a slow lead time (for example, one of
my employers still recommends RHEL 5.x, which is “current”, though 6.x is out.
RHEL 5.x uses Kernel 2.6).

------
jlgaddis
Perhaps Ubuntu will follow suit. They have came up with some really stupid
names over the years and, as a non-Ubuntu user, it's impossible to keep track
of what actual version "Retarded Rhino" corresponds to.

~~~
dagw
At least the Ubuntu where alphabetical so you knew the the release starting
with R was released after the release starting with Q. Apple, Fedora and
Debian releases on the other hand are completely random and every time I see
something like "Mountain Lion or later" I have to Google release names to find
out what it actually means and if I can run it or not.

------
mapleoin
This is coming after Fedora 17 Beefy Miracle and Fedora 18 Spherical Cow.

