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/20101006/000904.html | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 85 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101006/000904.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101006/000904.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101006/000904.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101006/000904.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..35b3fa4d7 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101006/000904.html @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle? + + + + + + + + + +

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

+ R James + upsnag2 at gmail.com +
+ Wed Oct 6 19:10:48 CEST 2010 +

+
+ +
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org> wrote:
+> Le mercredi 06 octobre 2010 à 18:42 +0200, Olivier Thauvin a écrit :
+>
+>> So, why not alternate both, 1 release with backports denied but long
+>> life, and the 2nd with backports and update but during a shorter period.
+>> (X.0 would be the new distro with backports, X.1 the one more servers
+>> oriented or enterprise).
+>
+> Well, we can do both, ie a long life, and optional backports ?
+>
+> because alterning may be quite puzzling for people.
+>
+> I would be in favor of some kind of LTS, like Ubuntu.
+>
+> We cannot have all release with long life, not enough ressources, but
+> having one from time to time would be good. Except we first need to be
+> sure to be able to maintain a single release, so I would report this
+> project to 1 or 2 years in the future.
+>
+What is the typical deployment period for servers?
+
+At the company where I work, they're leased for 3 years.
+
+If that's the average, then perhaps 3-year LTS would be sufficient?
+
+ + + + + + + + +
+

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