From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101002/000647.html | 93 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 93 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101002/000647.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101002/000647.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101002/000647.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101002/000647.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..4be3b600e --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101002/000647.html @@ -0,0 +1,93 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle? + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?

+ Jéjé + jeje-mageia at sfr.fr +
+ Sat Oct 2 02:11:37 CEST 2010 +

+
+ +
atilla ontas wrote:
+
+> I'm just wondering if we follow Mandriva's release cycle model.
+
+(...)
+
+> One more thing. Do we follow Mandriva's release naming scheme? I.e. do
+> we call our first release 2011.x ? I don't like this naming scheme and
+> suggesting using number of release as naming like Mageia 1.0 or using
+> code names.
+
+> What's your opinion?
+
+What about doing both :
+
+
+o  First a conservative rolling distribution. There's a lot of demand for that kind of distribution, even Debian seems to think about a stable testing. It would be the way to use Mageia for the average desktop user.
+
+
+o  In addition an about-1-year release cycle distribution, a "snapshot" of the rolling one, supported 2 years, more suitable for entreprise/server use or for people with very low internet bandwith.
+
+
+I'm not certain it would be more time consuming than a 6 month release cycle, and it would please a lot of people.
+
+
+
+
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1