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

[andré]

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)