[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion - messages from the forum

Tue Jun 14 12:40:33 CEST 2011

+by *corbintech 
+<https://forums.mageia.org/en/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=646>* » 
+Jun 13th, '11, 22:12
+I quit the ML because I was not doing it right (never used a list like 
+that before).
+
+So if I may, I will post here what somebody responded to me and write my 
+response here.
+
+    complete rolling release would put a QA strain on each of the
+    levels. think
+    about it, it's not only the current package being updated, but also the
+    combinations with other packages. (AND also all the long time supported
+    versions)
+
+    This would mean that for each package being release, it'll have to
+    work with
+    the current set of other packages, but also with the packages you'll
+    be doing
+    next.
+
+    if you have this constant level of QA, you need alot of resources
+    (which we
+    don't have in QA), and as an extra result, you'll not have the same
+    level of
+    QA you could have, when you're doing a release.
+
+    it's much easier (as devs) to just choose a subset of packages, and
+    test those
+    out.
+
+    if you have X QA-devs, and you have 1 subset of versions of
+    packages, you can
+    test alot more than if you have several versions of several packages
+    that need
+    to work all with each other in almost any combinations...
+
+    not to mention that you need an extra step with QA to put a "group" of
+    packages from one level to the next...
+
+    sorry, but with our current resources, i vote no. i want current
+    resources to
+    be used much more efficiently than with a rolling release.
+
+
+
+Why do we keep acting like there is no other way to pool resources? I 
+have never helped develop in any way, teach me something and I'll lend a 
+hand... Others may do the same.. ASK!
+
+QA comes from testing... Test... Test... And test more... To make sure 
+what you have works and works well. Let's change up my idea a bit and 
+satisfy everyone... Let's compromise...
+
+How about Cooker (or whatever you call) rolls to rolling (can be very 
+stable???!!!) with release cycle releases based on a snapshot of either 
+of the rolling models and supported for X amount of time? This could 
+make those whom want a rolling release model happy and those whom want a 
+release cycle.
+
+Would this be hard? I don't really think so as development is already 
+based on a rolling model (cooker or whatever), all that will have to be 
+done is packages roll down the line. I seen in the start of all these 
+talks you wanted to support 3 structures of systems... Here they are!
+
+What about this? Get the community involved!
+-------------- next part --------------
+An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
+URL: </pipermail/mageia-dev/attachments/20110614/74831276/attachment.html>
+