[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion

Mon Jun 13 23:06:11 CEST 2011

Am Sonntag, 12. Juni 2011, 22:46:33 schrieb Michael Scherer:
+> Proposal 1: 
+> 6 months release cycle -> 12 months life cycle
+> ( Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva < 2010.1 && Mandriva != 2006.0 )
+> 
+> Proposal 2: 
+> 9 months release cycle -> 18 months life cycle  
+> ( ~ opensuse and the one we used for Mageia 1 )
+> 
+> Proposal 3: 
+> 12 months release cycle -> 24 months life cycle
+> ( Mandriva > 2010.1 )
+
+Here is my opinion for this discussion:
+
+The question of the release cycle is conected with the question of the release 
+model.
+
+And all proposals we make are restricted by the manpower.
+
+Actally there are two release models active in the linux scene:
+1. a static release every X months
+2. a rolling release
+
+*But* a mix of both is also possible.
+
+A rolling release has following advantages:
+1. the distribution is always up to date (also hardware support) 
+2. no re-install over and over again
+
+and following disadvantages
+1. it's a heavy load for the devs
+2. we can almost only ship vanilla software. No real integration in the 
+distribution. With all it's advantages and disadvantages
+3. hard to guarantee the stability over the years
+4. no inovations within the software (see second disadvantage)
+
+A static releas has the following advantages:
+1. less load for the devs
+2. easier to support
+3. patching is possible
+4. most distribution use this release model
+
+and followind disadvantages;
+1. no new hardware support
+2. no new software versions
+
+This is the current situation.
+
+Some users also wants the a mix of both (also called a light rolling release) 
+and combine the advantages as far as possible.
+This could look like this:
+Bring up a release once a year. The core (kernel, glib, ...) will only get 
+minor updates. Apllications like firefox, libreoffice, ... will always be up to 
+date (rolling). Maybe also the desktop envirenments could be rolling but this 
+is very heavy.
+
+The light rolling releas has the following advantages:
+1. the apps are always up to date
+2. less load for devs than a full rolling release
+3. patching is possible
+4. innovations are possible
+5. no other distribution is using such a release model
+6. the stability is easier to guarentee than rolling release
+
+and following disadvantages
+1. more load than static release
+2. no new hardware support (could be done via backports if needed)
+
+If such a release model is possible, is up to the devs to decide (I can't 
+evaluate the work load). But we have to bear in mind, that we have enough 
+range for new inovations. 
+
+Please keep also in mind, that a distribution doesn't or shouldn't exists for 
+end in itself. It's just a operating systems and as long as there isn't a real 
+need for re-installing we shouldn't. Thus, we shouldn't enforce the user for 
+re-installing more than needed.
+
+Hope this wasn't to much text ^^
+
+Greetings,
+Thorsten
+
+