[Mageia-discuss] ISO 0 specification

andre999 andr55 at laposte.net
Wed Nov 3 15:43:58 CET 2010

Michael Scherer a écrit :
> Le mardi 02 novembre 2010 à 09:20 +0100, Maarten Vanraes a écrit :
>> I read the full meeting logs from 25/10, and i noticed tmb saying:
>> "pretty much a cooker snapshot"
>> I donno how far you're going to take this; but i thought we would be getting a
>> new version out ASAP.
>> in my understanding, we would get a 2010.1 snapshot and use it to build the
>> first ISO.
>> and use the cooker snapshot to get a cauldron.
>> imo the cooker is sooo unstable and broken, we will not be able to get a
>> working ISO from it, that is more or less stable in this timeframe.
>> eg:
>>   * KDE
>>   * glib
>>   * perl
>>   * python
>>   * RPM
>>   * ...
>> most of these will get fixed, in time; but what about ALL the packages
>> depending on that? most of the packages aren't even maintained...
> They are not more maintained on 2010.1 than on cooker.
>> personally, i'm against using cooker to make a stable ISO 0.
> why that's what we do all the time, after a stabilisation period. It
> worked fine for the last 7 years, and that's a part of the process that
> is used by lots of distributions. ( have a devel tree, fork it for
> release, bug fix, release it ). There is slightly different variations
> ( fedora and no frozen rawhide, debian and testing/stable/unstable ),
> but all do the same, basically.
>> rebranding a 2010.1 will be lots more stable; and maintime we will have the
>> time to make cauldron (from cooker) into something good, so we will be able to
>> make a release based on cauldron on the 18th of september.
> But it would be less appealing, and this would make the life of the
> communication team slightly difficult. It would also mean getting older
> hardware support, older versions of various components ( like python,
> for example ).
> And this would not save anything, as the bugfix work will have to be
> done anyway sooner or later.
> More ever, the experience showed that if you give more time to fix bugs,
> bugs just take more time to be fixed ( aka, we are lazy ). The more
> visible evidence is the activity in Mandriva when a deadline appear "we
> will now freeze the version update", where suddenly everybody update
> everything ( while we could have done sooner )
> And postponing to september ( ie 6 months later ) will be imho more
> problematic, as this will add the current cooker breakage to the one
> introduced by all the changes that people will want to push in the 6
> months ( gnome 3, etc, etc ). We have already experience with the
> current 6 months cycles, but we do not really have with a 1 year cycle,
> and this may cause trouble.
> So it is better to split the work into small time based chunks, because
> that's something we know, and we should avoid surprise to start the
> distribution.

I agree to go with cooker.
1) We have a lot of experienced Mandriva people with Mageia who propose 

2) We have the enthusiasme of many new contributors for a community 
based distro.
Many, like myself, have valuable experience elsewhere.

3) We will be starting with a more up-to-date base.
Thus we can avoid much complication with backports, etc.

4) The process is the same as for Mandriva, and very similar to other 
major distros.
When starting a new distro, it is better to minimize major changes in 
the process, if there isn't a compelling reason to do so.

I fail to see the down side.

- André

More information about the Mageia-discuss mailing list