2. Version *numbers* aren't nearly as identifiable as using names. This is something that Ubuntu has on us and something we should consider. For example, most people don't say I am running 15.10, they say, I am running Wily.
FWIW, I regard Debian/Ubuntu names a huge barrier to adoption. They're a cute "insider" thing, but confusing to new users.
Interesting, that isn't my experience. Even customers say, "I am running Precise or Trusty" and then I have to remember which version number that is.
Doesn't match my experience at all. The vast majority of my customers refer to it by version number.
Also, considering Ubuntu is by far the largest used Linux distro, I am not sure how much of that is happening in practice.
Also very different from my experience. Outside things like docker (which most people don't run postgres on - yet?), redhat/centos is significantly bigger with my customers.
Just as a point of input - clearly our customers fall in fairly significantly different groups,and we need to be able to deal with both.
I should note that I am not suggesting we forgo version names but adding something that is fun could be useful... Something to think about.
FWIW, I believe redhat also has such "code names". Except really *nobody* use them there...