diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005500.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005500.html | 224 |
1 files changed, 224 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005500.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005500.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c33669e98 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005500.html @@ -0,0 +1,224 @@ +<!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=%3C201106131458.54678.stormi%40laposte.net%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="005573.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="005565.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion</H1> + <B>Samuel Verschelde</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Release%20cycles%20proposals%2C%20and%20discussion&In-Reply-To=%3C201106131458.54678.stormi%40laposte.net%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion">stormi at laposte.net + </A><BR> + <I>Mon Jun 13 14:58:54 CEST 2011</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005573.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="005565.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5500">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5500">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5500">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5500">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Le dimanche 12 juin 2011 22:46:33, Michael Scherer a écrit : +><i> Hi, +</I>><i> +</I>><i> so , with a little bit delay due to various things ( like everybody +</I>><i> asking stuff to us on irc on a hourly fashion ( people will I hope +</I>><i> recognize themselves )), Anne and I have reviewed the various proposals +</I>><i> made through years during the early period of the distribution, and +</I>><i> before at Mandriva. We took in account the feedback of people on forum, +</I>><i> on ml, nd those we have seen during events. We also discussed with +</I>><i> others distributions developers we know from Opensuse, Fedora, Debian, +</I>><i> Ubuntu about their release cycle, the choices they made and their +</I>><i> reasons. +</I> +A restitution to us of this overview of the other distros release cycles and +their choices, reasons, pros and cons would have been great, but I guess it +would have required much more time to write it. It would have helped +understand why the final decision you took was to keep the current model (not +counting the discussion about cycle duration and LTS). I'm not saying that I +want "rolling release", but beginning the discussion without saying much +concerning what has been a big discussion some months ago (and still is in the +forum) feels a bit weird to me. Especially when we kept telling people "wait, +we will have time to discuss it after Release 1". + +><i> To simplify the discussion, the proposals are all based on the fact that +</I>><i> 2 or 3 releases could be supported at a time. We could have different +</I>><i> schemes for that ( LTS every X release ( ubuntu ), different level of +</I>><i> support ( mandriva )), but as this is a slightly different discussion, +</I>><i> let's assume 2 supported releases for now, and let's discuss later for +</I>><i> that ( ie next week, once this one is finished ) +</I> +I can understand the reason for separating the discussions (simplification), +but it's hard to give a final opinion concerning the release cycle without +knowing whether there will be a LTS or not, when you care about the life cycle +duration. The backports policy also has a great impact to the matter : if we +manage to make using newer versions of popular software easy without much risk +nor obligatory need to upgrade, extending the release cycle is easier (I could +go with 12 months provided we find a way to improve hardware support as part of +the maintenance). + +To take an example concerning the impact of having an LTS release or not : +- 6 months release cycle + 1 LTS every few releases => ok for me (ubuntu way, +each intermediate release is an intermediate milestone to the LTS) +- 6 months release cycle, without a LTS => not ok for me, life cycle really +too short + +That said, as a choice has to be made, my vote goes to the compromise proposal +:<i> around 9 months release cycle (more or less 1 month depending on the amount +</I>of work to be done, adjustment to a given upstream release, KDE or GNOME for +example, and marketing calendar considerations). + +Best regards + +Samuel Verschelde +</PRE> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005573.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="005565.html">[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5500">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5500">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5500">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5500">[ 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> |