Adjective/Animal is sticking, version numbers are not

[Pausanias]

I was reading through an article on Linux today discussing Sun's potential partnership with Ubuntu (http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Sun_flirts_with_Ubuntu/0,2000061733,39256815,00.htm) and it struck me how the entire article uses "Dapper Drake" and "Breezy Badger" instead of 5.10 and 6.06.

It seems that everywhere, people are referring to Ubuntu by the adjective/animal codename. The version numbers, while "official," aren't really used that much even in serious publications.

This is all fine by me; I love the codenames. Others may have a different opinion (http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=183565&cid=15161048) especially when it comes to popularizing Ubuntu.

[briancurtin]

we've talked about this a few times before and i think the numbers should be the primary name. it sounds much too childish or unprofessional to me, calling the distro by the animal names. i think calling the releases by the animal names is fine for betas/flights/pre-releases and such, but now that ubuntu is really hitting the spotlight, the use of version numbers seem like a better choice.

[mostwanted]

I think having both is perfectly fine. That scheme works with Mac OS X, and it works with Ubuntu just as well.

[briancurtin]

i think theres a difference in how mac and ubuntu deal with animals in the names though. i dont hear all that many people refer to their mac as running 'tiger', and when they do, its just 'tiger.' while i think it is pretty creative, the names ubuntu uses are a bit out there, or "cartoonish" to some. referring to a mac as tiger, and then your ubuntu install as 'breezy' or 'dapper' sometimes might make people think "what the hell is this guy talking about?" in the professional world, i dont see people referring to ubuntu by the animal names, but it might catch on with that crowd and stick. we'll just have to see how this goes with Sun

[prizrak]

i think theres a difference in how mac and ubuntu deal with animals in the names though. i dont hear all that many people refer to their mac as running 'tiger', and when they do, its just 'tiger.' while i think it is pretty creative, the names ubuntu uses are a bit out there, or "cartoonish" to some. referring to a mac as tiger, and then your ubuntu install as 'breezy' or 'dapper' sometimes might make people think "what the hell is this guy talking about?" in the professional world, i dont see people referring to ubuntu by the animal names, but it might catch on with that crowd and stick. we'll just have to see how this goes with Sun
Well we got both so for "professional" environment you can use numbers. I don't see there being a problem with the codenames. In essence the name makes no difference the only issue I can think of is that you might not immediatly know that Edgy Eft is the new version of Ubuntu. Then again MS has no problem with that somehow. As they went from 98/NT4.0 to Millenium/2000 then XP and Vista.

[Pausanias]

The point is not whether any one of us thinks version numbers are better or code names are better.

The point is that regardless of what we think, the world at large is using adjective/animal overwhelmingly over the version numbers.

I actually think it's a good thing. Maybe it will create some fresh air in tech rooms everywhere and make for a paradigm shift.

[prizrak]

I find nothing wrong with codenames. It makes Ubuntu sound not boring :)