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

[Fernando Parra]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 11:52:27 +0200
Renaud MICHEL <r.h.michel+mageia-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Hello
> On samedi 16 octobre 2010 at 05:00, Fernando Parra wrote :
> > > On Friday, 15 October 2010 03:48:56 Fernando Parra wrote:
> > > So, we must "dumb down" everything, and not provide openldap backports
> > > for people running servers who want a convenient way to run the
> > > software version that will allow them to file bugs upstream (OpenLDAP
> > > team doesn't respond to bugs filed on non-current releases)?
> > 
> > Specially here the answer is obvious: The novice doesn't now what is
> > OpenLDAP! and maybe he wont hear about it for the rest of his life. New
> > versions of OpenLDAP should be stay available in the backports
> > repository, not as an automatic available upgrade.
> 
> Well, for example like OpenLDAP it is not a problem, because only users that 
> need it will install it, and those that might need it are most likely aware 
> what it implies to upgrade it to a newer version. So it will not bother 
> other users if it is in backports or even updates, because as they won't 
> have it installed, they won't be proposed to update.
> 
> It is more of a concern for things like cups or dbus, which most users will 
> use without knowing it, and won't know how to fix if it breaks (not even 
> knowing which package actually broke).
> 
> > > What do we do in the case where a new version of some software is
> > > available, and has been sent to cooker? How do we decide whether it
> > > should go to backports or not? And for which releases?
> > > 
> > > (FYI, for Mandriva users can typically request backports in bugzilla or
> > > on IRC, but we may need better means).
> > 
> > Ok, first at all, we must deicide what packages (not all of them!) will
> > be at the Rolling Ligth model. After that, all this packages must have
> > an appropriate path.
> 
> I don't understand what you mean by "appropriate path".
> 

Well, if we are talking about a new model, I think we need to redefine what will be the way that's Mageia offer these particular (Rolling Light) packages. I'm not closed to any method in particular.

> I think we should not decide before hand what packages will be backported, 
> we should maybe have a (short) list of packages that must not be backported 
> (like glibc) and then have backports either when contributors are willing to 
> make (and test) them, or on request.
> 
> Maybe we could also have a (short also) list of packages that we should 
> really try (the packaging team could decide to dedicate some of his 
> resources to that) to backport to the latest stable release, and maybe the 
> previous latest.
> Such packages would be for example firefox or OOo, packages that we know are 
> used by many (most) users, and many users are likely to want a newer 
> version.
> 
> > Anyway, after decide what packages will be in the Rolling Light, The OS
> > must be gentle with the user and show a Window with a Message like that:
> > 
> > There are available a new version of Firefox(as an example). Do you want
> > to install it? NO,   Maybe Later,   Show me more information,    Yes
> 
> A little OT, but:
> 
> Dialog windows should (almost) never have yes/no or ok/cancel choices, 
> because when an user see a yes/ok choice, he generally interpret it as "yes, 
> I want to keep on doing what I was doing". (and I know I have done it some 
> times myself)
> 
> In your example, the No/yes should be labelled something like "keep current 
> version" and "install new version".
> 

Ok, as more clear options, as it will be better.

> 
> cheers
> -- 
> Renaud Michel
> 

Regards from Mexico
-- 
Fernando Parra <gato2707 at yahoo.com.mx>