[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: Thoughts on changing our package names
- To: or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Thoughts on changing our package names
- From: coderman <coderman@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:31:09 -0800
- Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-dev-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-dev@xxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:31:12 -0500
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=MMZCpRb3eWb+44S16QCx5flFq3qLxBGpAcr5mpJKw5M=; b=Jgw7tNIX3JvZXBxpHkQsfOZ0G+fRbdahE9wVoeGnDsUjZYhSDJo8QerPIJwo3LXprO 2lHdZg82kKV0PJ+CT2PFHJdbAuqvFU8FPVlT6wV7PW3uq9w4lmTogC9cB/SH6wKZPa2I 24tnsvmRTZW0QpcTI6w9Ve0nYHuP7NJrXE1vs=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rqJdCu1e+yrnWcAAw5oJyO6rmWAQvvnkeI+QkqfAN5ZMD6lv6qvA5kB6Y/qehWmQPv ioiAhHIR9vhVbRRBHnO5Aoju2f4cU4G8VSQ1gMyDAbCIoXRO7wWRpsHx66oAE2cc8087 n0CukoJZnuhmxplgcRgQFMvQ/DwhD3U0zHlSk=
- In-reply-to: <4AFD55F8.9000409@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <4AFD55F8.9000409@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 4:50 AM, Andrew Lewman <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I've been meeting more and more tor users over the past few months who
> are confused by our package naming. They want to download a "tor
> bundle" but instead get a "vidalia bundle". They don't understand what
> the difference between vidalia, tor, polipo, and the other stuff in our
> bundles. It's all Tor to them.
>
> The version numbers also confuse them. They aren't sure what all the
> numbers mean, nor why they should care. From the perspective of a new
> user, they don't care about the different components of a package and
> what version each component is; they just need to know if they have the
> latest or not.
Agreed. Regardless of individual component versions I would also like
to see a single consistent version number associated with a singular
"Tor Bundle" installer.
The fact that this bundle is comprised of a number of different parts
like Polipo, Vidalia, etc. should be internal to the package and not
confusing the user.
> My next best thought is to simply name the installation bundles as such:
>
> Tor-Installation-Bundle-for-(Windows|OS X)-(bundle version number).
I would omit the -Installation- and -for- part for brevity and replace
Windows with Win32 as one day we may care about 64bit native builds.
That is, Tor-Bundle-Win32-1.0
Is the Installation part to distinguish from the no-install portable
Tor browser bundle? That is the extent of my bike shed commentary :)
> Only -stable versions of Tor get a bundle version number as described
> above. -alpha packages are still built the with the version numbers of
> tor and vidalia as a distinction. Alternatively, we could switch to
> some nomenclature such as odd numbered major versions as -alpha, even
> numbered major releases as -stable. However, given how fast we switch
> from -alpha to -stable, we'll be at Tor Installation Bundle for Windows
> 14.1 soon enough.
>
> Thoughts?
Sounds good!