[Mageia-dev] Release cycles proposals, and discussion

[Thorsten van Lil]

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