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

Thu Oct 7 02:24:31 CEST 2010

Ahmad Samir a écrit :
+> On 2 October 2010 14:50, Jérôme Martin<mageia at delaur.net>  wrote:
+>    
+>> Le vendredi 1 octobre 2010, Olivier Méjean a écrit :
+>>      
+>>> Le vendredi 1 octobre 2010 08:51:34, atilla ontas a écrit :
+>>>        
+>>      
+>>>> What's your opinion?
+>>>>          
+>>> What about a rolling distribution ? As an user (just plain user) i do not
+>>> think that installing a distribution is a goal, just a mean to use my
+>>> computer, so i wish i could not spend time installing a distribution every
+>>>   6 months or every year.
+>>>        
+Just because there is a new version of the distro every 6 months doesn't 
+mean you have to install it.  It just means that there is a truely 
+stable version every 6 months.  Some users will want to upgrade every 6 
+months, and some every 2 years (or whatever the maximum support 
+period).  Many may prefer to wait 3 months after release to ensure that 
+the minor bugs remaining are found.
+In the meantime, just use the upgrade functions -- Mandriva, which we 
+will presumably follow initially allows upgrading for any/all of 
+security-correctives, other-bug-correctives, general-upgrades, and 
+backports.
+
+The advantage of a new version of Mageia every 6 months is that it is a 
+collection of software that works well (except for inevitable minor 
+bugs) with versions that work together.  Some users, like myself, prefer 
+to upgrade every 6 months.
+Also, new users would prefer to start with a relatively recent stable 
+version.
+Creating a stable version every 6 months is a lot easier than a rolling 
+distro, or much shorter periods.
+Note that individual applications not infrequently encounter major bugs 
+in a presumably stable version.  For a distro, creating frequent stable 
+versions would be much more problematic.
+The down side of stable versions every 6 months is somewhat less recent 
+software, but those who want more recent can always download a backport.
+>> My opinion is nearly the same: what is the need to provide a new version each
+>> 6 months? The marketing point of view is not a valid answer since we do not
+>> need to satsify shareholders or follow the market.
+> Yes, but you have a distro to maintain, a reputation to uphold...
+>    
+Very important
+>> So when a new version is needed? My point of view is that a new version is
+>> needed when a big change will occur for exemple a new major release of KDE or
+>> gnome, Xorg, perl, python, jdk, ...
+>>      
+This would not be workable.  Even though many applications do produce 
+major releases about every 6 months, they rarely coincide.  As well as 
+often being delayed due to unexpected bugs.  Do we really want a new 
+release every few months ?
+It is much more useful for a major distribution (as hopefully Mageia 
+becomes) to have releases at more or less predictable intervals.
+>> We need to change our view. Actually, the date of the release is decide and
+>> the deciders (maketting, CEO, CTO, ?) choose which softwares will be include.
+>> I propose to look at release date of the main softwares and decide when a new
+>> version will be proposed.
+>>      
+> Hmm, no, IINM, that would be the release engineers job.
+>
+>    
+>> For smaller software, we do not need to wait for a new version of the distro.
+>> Just provide it as we do with the backport repository.
+>>      
+> New version =>  new features + new bugs; anyone who ran cooker for a
+> good amount of time have witnessed this fact....
+>    
+>> And no, rolling distro does mean use cauldron, since the system is not
+>> supposed to work properly and where critical breakage can appear.
+>>      
+> Ah, yes, so you want a rolling release, just like Cauldron will be,
+> but that's not broken; now how should one go about guaranteeing that
+> this will actually work out OK?
+>
+> A rolling distro means double work for the devs and packagers as a new
+> version may just introduce new bugs too, now they don't provide the
+> new versions in a controlled development release where you're warned
+> that "this is a development release not suitable for day-to-day
+> production machines", or in a "unsupported backports" repo, no, it'll
+> just go to the stable release too.....
+>    
+I would say a lot more than double the work.  And more than double the 
+resources.
+> Now don't only think about a Mageia installation on a personal
+> computer, where even if the system is totally hosed you can easily do
+> a new install or restore a backup (then update to latest), but you
+> also have to bear in mind users who have servers doing all sorts of
+> jobs, they want stability over new-shiny-versions; the same goes for
+> school/university labs... etc.
+>    
+And even for personal use, not many would appreciate having to do an 
+unanticipated reinstall or restore from backup.  Particularly those who 
+want to avoid upgrading their distro every 6 months. ;)
+
+Rolling distro, anyone ?
+
+- André (andre999)
+