[VOTE] using release names or not

John Crispin john at phrozen.org
Wed Oct 25 03:19:45 EDT 2017

On 24/10/17 23:00, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> Hi,
> For the lede-17.01 release we did not use a release name, I do not
> consider "reboot" a release name here. OpenWrt used release names in the
> past.
> 1. Use release names for releases in addition to a release number, for
> example 17.01 DESIGNATED DRIVER, like it was done for OpenWrt releases.
> 2. Use no release names and only use release numbers, like it was done
> in the LEDE 17.01 release.

i'd prefer option 2 aswell

> This vote is not about which release name to choose, but if we want some
> at all, if we want some we should decide about a release name later. If
> we later want to change the decision again, we can do a new vote and
> change it. This would affect the naming of the current master repository
> and the next release.
> I am for option 2 to go without any release names because we had some
> trouble finding and agreeing on one in the past in OpenWrt, even if they
> are funny I think they are not needed.
> I started this vote base on this request from Zoltan:
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/lede-dev/2017-October/009509.html
> Hauke
> _______________________________________________
> lede-adm mailing list
> lede-adm at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-adm

More information about the openwrt-adm mailing list