From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jelle Licht Subject: Re: [PATCH] Refer to GuixSD as beta software Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 17:16:29 +0200 Message-ID: References: <5703BDD4.6090903@gmx.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3358a67b115052fbe54ed Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49659) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1anSiX-0007ej-LE for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2016 11:16:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1anSiW-0002Sw-9R for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2016 11:16:33 -0400 Received: from mail-lb0-x235.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c04::235]:36155) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1anSiV-0002RD-Ta for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2016 11:16:32 -0400 Received: by mail-lb0-x235.google.com with SMTP id qe11so11445498lbc.3 for ; Tue, 05 Apr 2016 08:16:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5703BDD4.6090903@gmx.net> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Florian Paul Schmidt Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --001a11c3358a67b115052fbe54ed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 According to that definition, beta does not seem to be a monniker we should be using on the website then either ;-). Either way, it would be nice to apply these terms consistently. Jelle On Apr 5, 2016 3:30 PM, "Florian Paul Schmidt" wrote: > On 05.04.2016 14:08, Jelle Licht wrote: > > Although it is mostly me nitpicking, I was installing GuixSD on an old > > laptop and noticed that the message of the day of the installation image > > still referred to GuixSD as alpha software. > > > > This patch changes the motd of the installer use the term beta software > > instead. > > Some more nitpicking: I don't know if the Guix project has agreed on the > semantics on the terms "alpha" and "beta", but the usual definition is > that in "alpha" software might undergo big unexpected (by the user) > changes so "so it may BREAK IN UNEXPECTED WAYS." is an appropriate > warning. In "beta" this kind of breakage should not happen. I.e. "beta" > usually means that the general state of the software is stable and no > big breakages are expected, but rather it's a phase of ironing out the > remaining kinks. > > Flo > > -- > https://fps.io > > --001a11c3358a67b115052fbe54ed Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

According to that definition, beta doe= s not seem to be a monniker we should be using on the website then either ;= -).


Either way, it would be nice to apply th= ese terms consistently.

Jelle

On Apr 5, 2016 3:30 PM, "Florian Paul Schmi= dt" <mista= .tapas@gmx.net> wrote:
On 05.04.2016 14:08, Jelle Licht wrote:
> Although it is mostly me nitpicking, I was installing GuixSD on an old=
> laptop and noticed that the message of the day of the installation ima= ge
> still referred to GuixSD as alpha software.
>
> This patch changes the motd of the installer use the term beta softwar= e
> instead.

Some more nitpicking: I don't know if the Guix project has agreed on th= e
semantics on the terms "alpha" and "beta", but the usua= l definition is
that in "alpha" software might undergo big unexpected (by the use= r)
changes so "so it may BREAK IN UNEXPECTED WAYS." is an appropriat= e
warning. In "beta" this kind of breakage should not happen. I.e. = "beta"
usually means that the general state of the software is stable and no
big breakages are expected, but rather it's a phase of ironing out the<= br> remaining kinks.

Flo

--
https://fps= .io

--001a11c3358a67b115052fbe54ed--