diff options
| author | Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mageia.org> | 2013-04-14 13:46:12 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mageia.org> | 2013-04-14 13:46:12 +0000 |
| commit | 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 (patch) | |
| tree | b175f9d5fcb107576dabc768e7bd04d4a3e491a0 /zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005532.html | |
| parent | fa5098cf210b23ab4f419913e28af7b1b07dafb2 (diff) | |
| download | archives-master.tar archives-master.tar.gz archives-master.tar.bz2 archives-master.tar.xz archives-master.zip | |
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005532.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005532.html | 183 |
1 files changed, 183 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005532.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005532.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ac91a2c7c --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005532.html @@ -0,0 +1,183 @@ +<!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=%3Calpine.LMD.2.00.1106131021040.30401%40astro.scholar.athome%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="005657.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="005535.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion</H1> + <B>Dale Huckeby</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Release%20cycles%20proposals%2C%20and%20discussion&In-Reply-To=%3Calpine.LMD.2.00.1106131021040.30401%40astro.scholar.athome%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion">spock at evansville.net + </A><BR> + <I>Mon Jun 13 17:37:25 CEST 2011</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005657.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="005535.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5532">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5532">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5532">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5532">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Wolfgang Bornath wrote: + +><i> About the cycles: +</I>><i> +</I>><i> The problems with 6-months have been pointed out - my main concern +</I>><i> would be the lack of manpower and the continuous state of +</I>><i> "pre-release", no real room to sit back and contemplate hwat is and +</I>><i> what could be and all the rest. IMHO such a "contemplating" time is +</I>><i> necessary to keep the whole picture in focus. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> The problems with 12-months have also been pointed out and I agree +</I>><i> with them (too long out of public focus, too long for the main +</I>><i> userland applications, etc.). +</I>><i> +</I>><i> The 9-months seem to be a compromise - but I start to ask why we need +</I>><i> such a fixed statement (which it would be, once published). We need a +</I>><i> schedule for each cycle, that's true. Without a schedule we would +</I>><i> never finish anything. But how about taking 9 months only as a "nice +</I>><i> to meet" target, leaving us the option to set a roadmap after setting +</I>><i> the specs of the next release - we could then go for a 8 or 10 months +</I>><i> roadmap, depending on the specs. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> This being said, I am a friend of a rolling release like ArchLinux, +</I>><i> but I fear that our main target group is not up to this. Despite of +</I>><i> having to "burn yet another DVD" as somebody pointed out, the majority +</I>><i> seems to see this as normal and a good way. Of course I may be totally +</I>><i> wrong with this assessment! +</I> ++1 + +The consensus so far seems to be: + +6 months is too short +12 months is too long +9 months is juuuuust about right + +and that applies not only to developers having a chance to catch their breath between versions, but +users too. A 6-month turnaround feels like I'm constantly updating, but a 12-month wait between +versions is like forever. And as wobo suggests, 9 months need be only an average, with a target date +for the next release, taking into account upstream developments, decided on after each one. Also, +the target date should be approximate at first and firmed up only as we get closer to release. + +spock +</PRE> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005657.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="005535.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5532">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5532">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5532">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5532">[ 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> |