Examples could be things like specific configuration defaults or general decision-making in leadership.

What would you change?

  • LeFantome
    1·
    10 months ago

    I have never really been an Ubuntu user. When I started reading your comment, I was thinking “well that seems like a prettt small nitpick”. Then I realized the problem and now I am 100% behind you. You are right, they elate throwing away one of the greatest strengths of the distro in that releases ( numbered releases ) have easy to understand and very meaningful names.

    So much information thrown away just to be cute.

    Is there a reason? Do the dots in the release numbers confuse things? Or is it purely historical?

    Somebody needs to create a fork of APT that does this ( uses release numbers instead ). It could translate the release numbers you use in your sources file to the code names before making the request. I mean, they are unambiguously convertable.

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      1·
      10 months ago

      Is there a reason? Do the dots in the release numbers confuse things? Or is it purely historical?

      I think it goes back to Debian using “Toy Story” characters for releases - they’re in the same bed here as Ubuntu (I’m running “bullseye”). I’m not sure how it started but it’s too cute for no gain. At least the docker images are tagged with both so you don’t need to remember whether “jammy” is an LTS or not.