Consistency of release names

theotherosproject

I would like to edit some release names to be more consistent and convenient. For example, I like how the Windows NT4 Final releases are formatted, such as Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 Workstation (4.00.1381.1) [Danish]. But if I go to (let's say) Windows 95 RTM releases, there are many releases that are just titled Windows 95.

I feel that it will be easier to include the language and version info into the release names themselves rather than in the columns. What do you think?

stitch

The idea behind the columns is to allow for eventual sorting - something we can not easily do with all that metadata crammed into the name string. I'm also personally not big on redundancy.

theotherosproject

I'd also like to say that a handful of unstable releases have their language set as False..

SomeGuy

"False" was the default value for this field. If something is still set to False that just means nobody has looked at it yet. I am sure there are still plenty out there like that. I've mainly been focusing on the applications, which ones do you see are still set to false?

The naming conventions are kind of work in progress. Stitch has some ideas about automatically merging the attribute fields with the actual file name, leaving only bits that don't quite fit with the standard attributes in the download name. On the more cluttered pages, the redundant bits have already been removed, but at the moment that can be a tad confusing.

theotherosproject

SomeGuy wrote:

"False" was the default value for this field. If something is still set to False that just means nobody has looked at it yet. I am sure there are still plenty out there like that. I've mainly been focusing on the applications, which ones do you see are still set to false?

I focused on Windows NT here, so I can say the False values are found at Windows 2000 Pre-Beta thru RC 2 plus Patches, and Windows Longhorn Pre-Reset and Post-Reset.

SomeGuy

I'll make a note to look at those when I get a chance.

Are these all CD ISO images? (I don't want to download all of those just to check)

Since I am thinking about it, my personal preference for file naming convention is along the line of:

Official Product Name Version For OS (SubVersion)[OEM company][Platform][Language](Media)

Omitting the optional parts that are default or understood that still provides sufficient differentiation between different packages.

But there are many crazy little exceptions.

theotherosproject

It seems most of the archives contain a disc image, and WinWorld text file. The patch archives contain only an executable file