<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">
<!--
body { margin-left: 4px; font-variant: normal; margin-right: 4px; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 1px; margin-top: 4px }
p { margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0 }
-->
</style>
</head>
<body style="margin-left: 4px; margin-right: 4px; margin-top: 4px; margin-bottom: 1px">
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">How about just plain old "OSGEO-Live" as a title?</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">bobb</font> </p>
<br> <br>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<br>
<br>
>>> Alex Mandel <tech_dev@wildintellect.com> wrote:<br> </p>
<div style="margin-left: 15px; border-left: solid 1px #050505; margin-right: 0; background-color: #f3f3f3; padding-left: 7px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
<p style="margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0">
I'd like to discuss the name briefly. I realize Cameron is on vacation<br>and probably won't respond for a week, but I don't think that should<br>hold back at least a discussion. Hopefully we can make a decision by the<br>Feature Freeze date.<br><br>Based on previous conversations I'd like to suggest that we move to<br>calling the disc/project:<br>OSGeo-LiveGIS or OSGeo-LiveGeospatial<br>I think this is fairly important as we need to properly attribute that<br>OSGeo/FOSS4G is a main driver of this effort and provides infrastructure<br>for the production(We've been discussing a whole other plan for how to<br>properly give credit to sponsors and contributors) I realize it's hard<br>to come up with a name that adequately describes that we have DVD,VM and<br>USB based distribution methods, but to me those are distribution methods<br>and we're not focusing on any one so it seems good to just leave that out.<br><br>An acceptable alternative would be to come up with a new brand, to<br>permanently fly under, but this might be very hard to come to agreement<br>on considering the wide variety of contributors. If we decided to build<br>a new brand name I think we would also want to move towards becoming a<br>real project with a PSC, dedicated website, etc.<br><br>Version Naming:<br>Each version(or maybe each year) getting it's own mascot/personalized<br>name as given by the conference organizers of Foss4G. So Last year's was<br>Arramagong, and that could carry until the next Foss4G, or the mid<br>year(between conferences) could just not have one?<br><br>Version Numbering, I see several options<br>By year with counter 2010.1 or 1.2010<br>By year and month 2010.3<br>By counter 3.0<br>I actually like the 1st 2 because it's more clear when the disc was made<br>and that gives you some idea of what version of software you'll find on<br>them and how recent the build was, a straight counter while letting you<br>know how many have been built is going to increment quite quickly and to<br>mean doesn't really convey much to the end user, it means much more to<br>the developers.<br><br>I welcome your thoughts,<br>Alex<br>_______________________________________________<br>Live-demo mailing list<br>Live-demo@lists.osgeo.org<br><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live</a>-demo<br>
</p>
</div>
</body>
</html>