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/20101011/001076.html | 123 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 123 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101011/001076.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101011/001076.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101011/001076.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101011/001076.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..47525c3e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101011/001076.html @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle? + + + + + + + + + +

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

+ vfmBOFH + vfmbofh at gmail.com +
+ Mon Oct 11 17:27:41 CEST 2010 +

+
+ +
2010/10/6 vfmBOFH <vfmbofh at gmail.com>
+
+>
+>
+> 2010/10/1 atilla ontas <tarakbumba at gmail.com>
+>
+>> I'm just wondering if we follow Mandriva's release cycle model. Every
+>> 6th months a release or one year and one release. I think we should
+>> make one release in one year. By doing so devs and translators won't
+>> be in rush in every 6 months. Also there are major changes like
+>> systemd/upstart; those system related things will be more mature in a
+>> year to use. It makes the distro more stable and decraese mirrors
+>> space waste.
+>>
+>> 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?
+>>
+>
+> Hi all.
+>
+> At this time, there is a survey asking to the blogdrake's community  what
+> kind of release cycle they prefer. This survey will be active until the
+> weekend and I think this could be an acceptable look about community
+> preferences.
+>
+> We must keep on mind we're creating a user-oriented distro, so we must be
+> stay in touch about their preferences.
+>
+> Cheers
+>
+>
+Hi all again.
+
+As i said, there's the results of the poll published in Blogdrake:
+
+58% of votes are for maintain the same mandriva's release cycle scheme (same
+scheme, not parallel releases) There are several opinions about the
+periodicity of the releases: six months, eight months, annual... all options
+are more or less the same level of preference.
+
+24% has chosen the "Rolling-light" model. as in the traditional model, there
+are opinions that support the annual release, six months or eight months.
+But this option, is dominated by the annual release of the "core".
+
+15% supports the "pure-Rolling" model. There's nothing to say about release
+dates.
+
+Surprisingly, there is also a minority support to a model similar to the
+"Debian way". I must confess that this last option on the poll was started
+as a joke, because Blogdrake's members often suffer "versionitis". But there
+are the votes (3%)...
+
+So, these are the results of the survey. Apparently, the Blogdrake's
+community is closer to a model "release + backports".
+
+I think it should be noted (as far as possible) the preferences of the
+community, in addition to technical and logistical constraints. Maybe with
+similar polls in other local communities?
+
+Cheers.
+-------------- next part --------------
+An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
+URL: </pipermail/mageia-dev/attachments/20101011/c0f4beb7/attachment.html>
+
+ + + +
+

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