On Mar 28, 2016 9:20 AM, "Michael Catanzaro" <mcatanzaro gnome org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2016-03-27 at 07:53 +0000, Florian Müllner wrote:
> > Distributions appear in the video in the order of when 3.20 is
> > expected to
> > be included in the distribution.
>
> It's hard to believe that's what's intended. If so, it's very wrong.
> The order depicted in the video is:
>
> Arch -> Debian -> Fedora -> openSUSE
>
> which is correct under no interpretation I can think of.
Alphabetic.
> How could
> Debian possibly be depicted prior to Fedora? If we are counting stable
> distros, then Debian should be towards the end of the list, after even
> Ubuntu. Same for openSUSE:
>
> Arch (April) -> Fedora (June) -> (Ubuntu, October) -> openSUSE?
> (November?) -> Debian (2017) -> openSUSE? (November 2017?)
>
> I do not know where openSUSE goes in relation to Debian, because they
> have the new enterprise base thing going on, and I am not sure what
> their GNOME plans are for the next release. If they release in November
> with GNOME 3.20, then they belong in front of Debian; if they release
> with 3.18 or perhaps 3.16 again, then they belong behind Debian.
>
> Now, if we are counting unstable distros (which I do not think we
> should do), then the order would be:
>
> Fedora rawhide (immediate) -> Arch Gnome-Unstable (already has it) ->
> openSUSE Tumbleweed (probably early April) -> Debian sid (probably this
> spring) -> Ubuntu (probably this summer)
>
> I don't see any way that Arch -> Debian -> Fedora -> openSUSE could
> possibly be interpreted as the correct order, if that graphic is really
> intended to signify the real order.
>
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list gnome org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list