Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add CODENAMES.md #318

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Apr 10, 2018
Merged

add CODENAMES.md #318

merged 7 commits into from
Apr 10, 2018

Conversation

Trott
Copy link
Member

@Trott Trott commented Mar 31, 2018

Fixes: #317

@tunnckoCore
Copy link

Only left, writers of articles to use them ;d

Copy link
Member

@richardlau richardlau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder if we should add the existing names (i.e., Argon, Boron, and Carbon)? Otherwise by implication we should remember to update this list to delete, e.g., Dubnium when 10.x goes LTS?

Copy link
Member

@jasnell jasnell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are these just suggestions at this point? How was the list come up with? I'm afraid I may have missed something being disconnected a bit over the previous week. I'd like to review this and think about the naming a bit more before this lands.

@kyrylkov
Copy link

kyrylkov commented Apr 1, 2018

@jasnell #317 (comment)

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Apr 1, 2018

Ok, so it's still an open discussion then. Rather than committing to these names for the next number of years, I'd rather we just come up with a better scheme now.

@shelleyp
Copy link

shelleyp commented Apr 1, 2018

As I noted elsewhere #291 lordie, what is the issue now?

Other than Axel's legitimate concern #317 (comment) (gold does have unique connotations) the list is toasty.

More importantly, you'll be done. Done. A not-that-consequential item will actually be resolved, and you can then move on to the what-will-we-ultimately-do-about-buffer-constructor issue.

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Apr 1, 2018

Rather than committing to these names for the next number of years, I'd rather we just come up with a better scheme now.

@jasnell Those two options are not mutually exclusive. Sure, let's come up with a better naming scheme. But in the meantime, let's have a list of names that don't need to be debated until that new scheme comes. Approve this, and you still don't have to debate names for individual releases even if conversation about whether the theme should be Futurama characters or Simpsons characters drags on for 7 years.

Literally. You won't need a new theme until 2025. But if you manage to select a new theme before 10.x, then great. You can throw this out at that time.

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Apr 1, 2018

@shelleyp By the way, I updated Gold to Gaiilium as suggested by @rauschma in #317.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Apr 1, 2018

@Trott ... I'll look at this more tomorrow after the holiday. We're still 23 days out from the release so there's no reason to rush.

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Apr 1, 2018

@Trott ... I'll look at this more tomorrow after the holiday. We're still 23 days out from the release so there's no reason to rush.

@jasnell Waiting a day is no big deal, and I'd rather get more @nodejs/release approvals anyway. But please let us not give even the appearance of slow-walking this.

We all complain (correctly) that it is impossible to keep track of everything that goes on across the nodejs project issue trackers. This is an opportunity to short-circuit predictable endless low-value bike-shedding. Failure to do this means needlessly exacerbating the very problem we presumably are interested in addressing.

@styfle
Copy link
Member

styfle commented Apr 1, 2018

I may have missed this part of the discussion, but are you intentionally skipping J?

That might confuse users who don’t know the complete list of code names.

@drewfish
Copy link

drewfish commented Apr 1, 2018

@styfle There are no chemical element names that start with J, not in English at least. (Or not yet... perhaps someone will discover/name something by 2023 😄)

@styfle
Copy link
Member

styfle commented Apr 1, 2018

@drewfish Yes I am aware of the issue.

But perhaps this PR should end at Iron and then we can bikeshed J at a future date. And it is possible something will be discovered in that time.

CODENAMES.md Outdated
* Gallium (16.x 2021)
* Hydrogen (18.x 2022)
* Iron (20.x 2023)
* Krypton (22.x 2024)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Remove Krypton and Lithium.

styfle
styfle approved these changes Apr 1, 2018
Copy link
Member

@styfle styfle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Remove Krypton and Lithium. This is assuming we will skip J and I don't think this PR should be making that assumption.

Everything else looks good 👍

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Apr 1, 2018

@styfle I agree on not assuming we'll skip J so I took out the K and L names. Now the list will get us out "only" 5 years to 2023.

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Apr 1, 2018

Hmmm...unfortunately @nodejs/release does not in fact contain everyone listed in the README as a member. (In fact, it is less than half the people listed!) Despite what the README says to the contrary, it looks like the full membership (or at least something closer to it) is in @nodejs/LTS.

So, uh: @nodejs/LTS PTAL.

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Apr 2, 2018

Hmmm...my attempt to @-mention @nodejs/lts failed. Preview tells me this one will succeed. So trying again...

@nodejs/lts PTAL

@bnb
Copy link
Contributor

bnb commented Apr 2, 2018

I am not a member of the Releases WG, but +1 from me. Thanks for taking the needed initiative here, @Trott ❤️

* Boron (6.x 2016)
* Carbon (8.x 2017)
* Dubnium (10.x 2018)
* Erbium (12.x 2019)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please mark everything for 12.x and higher as "tentative".

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That is... tentative in so far as we may come up with a different naming scheme.

Copy link
Member Author

@Trott Trott Apr 5, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"Codenames for future releases are subject to change." This way we don't have to update this document every release.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you

@gibfahn
Copy link
Member

gibfahn commented Apr 3, 2018

+1 on this, let's just have a set of names we can default to, then if there's ever enough of an agreement to change the names then we can do that (be it next week or in 4 years).

FWIW I think the best text name for Node 10.x is Ten, but that's just me 😁 .

However I think if we're going to have this it should be machine readable, so we can use it for backporting.

@ljharb
Copy link
Member

ljharb commented Apr 3, 2018

@gibfahn nvm reads it from the index.tab on nodejs.org/dist, is that not what you mean by machine readable?

@gibfahn
Copy link
Member

gibfahn commented Apr 3, 2018

@gibfahn nvm reads it from the index.tab on nodejs.org/dist, is that not what you mean by machine readable?

That's fine, but I'm talking about having a tool for backporting that works out that the first LTS version of Node 8 (8.6.0 or whatever) should be called Node Carbon for creating the release, so it can't rely on that page.

I'm fine with that format though.

@srl295
Copy link
Member

srl295 commented Apr 3, 2018

machine readable

Isn't the codename already a field in https://github.com/nodejs/Release/blob/master/schedule.json ? Could we just add values to that (marked tentative)?

Copy link
Member

@mhdawson mhdawson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@gibfahn
Copy link
Member

gibfahn commented Apr 3, 2018

Isn't the codename already a field in /schedule.json@master ? Could we just add values to that (marked tentative)?

SGTM

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Apr 5, 2018

Someone land this! (I'm not a member of the working group so I'm not going to do it because that would be rude.)

Copy link
Member

@srl295 srl295 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

approved with a friendly amendment

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
This file contains a list of codenames for LTS releases. Codenames for future
releases are subject to change.
Copy link
Member

@srl295 srl295 Apr 6, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It just hit me that this is the same repo as ./schedule.json. Could we at least mention that file or even have a link from there?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

also README.md here mentions the codenames and could link to CODENAMES.md

Copy link
Member

@srl295 srl295 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

approved with a friendlty amendment

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
This file contains a list of codenames for LTS releases. Codenames for future
releases are subject to change.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

also README.md here mentions the codenames and could link to CODENAMES.md

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Apr 9, 2018

@srl295 Added the links you requested. Everyone else might want to review. Also: Someone please land this! 😄

@gibfahn gibfahn merged commit 7dd5235 into nodejs:master Apr 10, 2018
ChALkeR pushed a commit to ChALkeR/LTS that referenced this pull request Jun 30, 2018
@Trott Trott deleted the codenames branch March 5, 2022 03:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.