[rfc] six-month stable release cycles
John Arbash Meinel
john at arbash-meinel.com
Wed Jul 29 23:40:42 BST 2009
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Talden wrote:
>> I'm *never* going to promise day-0 packages. Between coordinating
>> timezones, vacation schedules, level of development activity, bugfixing,
>> etc. Packaging is important, it certainly isn't the most important thing.
>
> As long as, when we do a product release announcement, we are clear
> that packaging announcements are forthcoming I see no problem.
>
>> Heck, when we get to the point of stable-every-6-months... if you are
>> running code that is 6mo out of date, does it really matter if it takes
>> an extra day to get it to you?
>
> Given that people do go straight to the page after seeing a release
> announcement (myself included), I edited the link text for the windows
> installer to clarify the bazaar version of that link. It has not been
> uncommon for the top of the download page to declare version X
> availability while the windows binary continues to be X-1 for as long
> as a week. Only the URL of the link indicated this.
>
> Being clear about packaging availability is very important - having
> them available 0-day in a 6mo cycle shouldn't be.
>
> --
> Talden
>
So I'll honestly admit that I'm close to being burnt out on making
Windows installers because
1) I don't use them myself, so I don't get any personal benefit. (I run
bzr.dev tip and plugins directly.) Going further, I also don't work
directly with anyone who does use it.
2) They take a fairly significant amount of my time to shepherd. (I have
to track down what the latest versions of the various plugins are that
claim compatibility with the latest version of bzr, run the build
script, deal with the fallout, run it again, and again until things
finally build. Upload it to my local server, sign it, upload it to
launchpad.)
3) You only really get bug reports from people running into problems,
which at best means re-running step 2 again. (you don't get much
positive feedback from building installers, because if things just work,
then they just work.)
4) I've been doing them primarily for the last .... long while. We set
up a shared windows host so that other people could do it, but nobody
has, and it generally has fallen down to the point where I notice and go
build them.
In theory once Sidnei's buildbot stuff is put together, should make it a
bit easier to maintain. Though somebody still has to do (2) and track
what the latest versions of all the various plugins are, and build it.
It would also have the advantage of running more of the test suite on
Windows, and at least the possibility of doing some automated testing of
the installer.
So in the end, if someone wants to step up and do more than complain
that I haven't gotten the releases built and tested enough, I'd be happy
to help them build and/or test installers.
John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkpwz+oACgkQJdeBCYSNAAPnowCeLeSx8hY6mjcmzgdoEK05nZkS
//oAoLpQWylD13s7YHDF73RI3NgTWkBv
=2sDJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the bazaar
mailing list