As mentioned by @Bugsbane it is to show the feature parity to the users. As for the Android app (which is now @ 2.0.1) it isnât much of a deal since versions are rather invisible in apps anyways so starting with 1.0.0 for the Android app is fine.
I dunno if the first release of Nextcloud is meant to be able to seamlessly upgrade from ownCloud 9.1.x (or if the envisioned easy + semi-automatic upgrade path is only for Nextcloud ânowâ to Nextcloud ânextâ).
If so, I would certainly name it Nextcloud 9.2, and strong communication efforts should be made to make it it clear to all current ownClouders that ownCloud 9.1.x can be upgraded to Nextcloud 9.2.
Whatever new versioning/naming scheme you want to use should come only after 9.2 and 9.x and should, after the decision, be announced well in advanceâŠ
Hi everybody,
Semantic versioning sounds good. While I like the idea of using Whistleblower names, I think a heapload of Users will not recognize any of the names used, other than Mr Snowden and Ms Manning. Dunno, if that is important for the Schema though.
Ar first I fancied the idea of Harbour names, as a 'safe Harbour â is one of the First things coming to mind when thinking about safety.
But I skipped it die to the lack of distinct names.
Next best Option to reflect saftey AND having a huge Pool of names available i can think of would be castles and keeps. So here goes:
How about Schönbrunn, Windsor, Neuschwanstein, Bastille and the lot for semantic versioning?
John
PS Thanks to Lukas for sorting out the registration issues. Much appreciated 
Funny you mention Castles, as itâs kind of similar to an idea I was thinking of, namely using forts (as they protect your stuff).
I donât think itâs hugely important for people to recognise the names used (cough Xenial Xerus, anyone?) so much as to have heard what the naming schema is based on.
While personally Iâd love to have whistleblowers, I do still think it would scare off many more enterprisey clients.
What about a naming schema based on famous documents from around the world that enshrined rights and freedoms? That way itâs linked to both Nextcloudâs connection to storing files and documents, and also that it gives freedom and privacy, for example:
(Sorry for not knowing more international suggestions off the top of my head)
âMagna Cartaâ
âDeclaration of Independenceâ
âBill of Rightsâ
"Charters of Freedom"
etc.
Iâm sure our very global user/contributor base could come up with equivalents from their own countries, giving us a long list of possibilitiesâŠ
Donât forget that you need 15+ names in alphabetical orders if you want that scheme to last for the next 5 years. Iâd rather people spend time on testing and documentation 
1 Like
Personally, Iâm not a fan of having code names have to be alphabetically ordered at all. Itâs a very arbitrary restriction, that says nothing about the core benefits being provided.
Inspiring names are good marketing. Good marketing helps make sure there are more people available for testing and documentation (among other things). 
1 Like
So I am also all for a semantic versioning scheme.
I donât really think that names should be three words long. Also, using document names doesnât really stand out to me. I would be much more interested in seeing versions be named after castles. I am always interested in getting the back story behind a name. A simple three sentence paragraph explaining the name in the blog post announcing the new version would be a great compromise between unknown names (sorry but being American, the only castleâs I recognize are the Bastille and Windsor) and taking up too much time working on the name.
No need for excuses: alas, you still know 2 castles more than I know names of forts 
I think there are so many castles in the world, we have enough names for the next 100 releases! A background story would be cool either. Every castle has its own history.
Hi,
For whatâs concerns myself, i never ever have been able to remember a version of any soft matching a name, for example âtrusty tahirâ or âYakkety Yakâ(ubuntu), etc etc.
Quite the contrary, a version numbers tells me immediately âwhere i amâ, and is much more universal.
1 Like
So you donât know Android KitKat, Marshmallow or Lollipop? And MacOS mountain lion is also very popular. We developers also know about Eclipse Mars or Luna. I think people who use our software will know which version is related to a specific name, but in the end the will of the community is binding
Sorry, but i hate that⊠I never know if âKitkatâ is after âLollipopâ or before⊠etc.etc.
A number tells me immediately.
(i probably must be an old dinosaurus) 
How could you not know that? L is after K so Lollipop came after KitKat. Thatâs why the name ordering is alphabetical.
Yes, yes, i know that but still much prefer to remember numbers than names. With names, you have to remember what was the previous one, etc. etc.
As long as releases have numbers, there can be a name, a story, a photo album, etc. linked to it, it doesnât matter much, as long as it doesnât take time away from the people delivering the project.
1 Like
Yes, sure 
I was teasing a little, but really with a full version number you know exactly where you are ! (main version, build version, etc.) With a single name you donât. I hate that.
we were not talking about just using a single name!
The discussion was about using a name in combination with semantic versioning
You will see that users will only remember the versionâs name⊠and when you have to debug a problem for themâŠ
Nobody knows exactly whether he is running 9.1.3 or 9.1.5 so everbody has to check the version number anyway. So if someone reports a problem, he has to declare the exact version number. The name just indicates the major release version. If we use names, just if, we can use forms which require the whole version number.
Many open source projects like fedora are working with a combination of names and version numbering since years and they donât have problems.
Hum, thatâs just marketing stuff⊠smarter than a line of numbersâŠ