1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Release%20cycles%20proposals%2C%20and%20discussion&In-Reply-To=%3C201106130048.17515.maarten.vanraes%40gmail.com%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="005444.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="005447.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion</H1>
<B>Maarten Vanraes</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Release%20cycles%20proposals%2C%20and%20discussion&In-Reply-To=%3C201106130048.17515.maarten.vanraes%40gmail.com%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion">maarten.vanraes at gmail.com
</A><BR>
<I>Mon Jun 13 00:48:17 CEST 2011</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005444.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="005447.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#5453">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#5453">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#5453">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#5453">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>Op zondag 12 juni 2011 23:38:48 schreef Angelo Naselli:
><i> In data domenica 12 giugno 2011 22:46:33, Michael Scherer ha scritto:
</I>><i> > Proposal 1:
</I>><i> > 6 months release cycle -> 12 months life cycle
</I>><i> > ( Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva < 2010.1 && Mandriva != 2006.0 )
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > Proposal 2:
</I>><i> > 9 months release cycle -> 18 months life cycle
</I>><i> > ( ~ opensuse and the one we used for Mageia 1 )
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > Proposal 3:
</I>><i> > 12 months release cycle -> 24 months life cycle
</I>><i> > ( Mandriva > 2010.1 )
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Well imo extending too much release cycle means also to
</I>><i> have a lot of backports and patches for fixings.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> So 1 or 2 are better, more upstream packages than fixings.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> If we cannot afford 6 mo release cycle because we're all volunteers for
</I>><i> instance, 9 mo one is the right compromise, i believe.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Cheers,
</I>
+1
allthough, _perhaps_ there is another option: (i didn't think about the effect
this would have on life cycles):
i was thinking, that maybe we want 9months now, because of big changes coming,
but maybe in the future we would do less big changes for instance.
Proposal 4:
JIT-fixed months release cycle -> ? months life cycle
explanation:
the idea is to have the following things happen after release:
1. postmortem
2. discussion of features
3. decision of features
4. making planning and deciding time based on the featurelist and an educated
guess on time required to implement and bugfix. (generally between 6 and 12
months)
....
pro:
- allows to plan release taking into account everything:
- list of features to be done (and amount of packagers)
- holidays
- releases of other distros
- stuff i hadn't thought of
con:
- there could be a pitfall that we ALWAYS don't fulfill the planning
- unknown months life cycle
in general, it would mean, what we do right now, there's a separate decision
every time.
thinking specifically on this time:
- 8months: 1st febr, bad idea: because of christmas holidays there will
likely be no good testing.
- 9months is 1st march? (sounds like a busy time for other distros)
- 10months: 1st april (april fools joke? not good)
I'm thinking 10,5 months for this one: April 15th. perhaps next time most big
changes will be done, and we could go for a short 6 or 7month release if we
have more resources at that time.
just my personal opinion,
Maarten
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005444.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="005447.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#5453">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#5453">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#5453">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#5453">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<hr>
<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev
mailing list</a><br>
</body></html>
|
