A Case for Modifying the Ubuntu Release Schedule

[Matt Zimmerman]

Decisions like this are generally delegated to the release team, so I'm
CCing them.  Further discussion should probably go to ubuntu-release.

For my part, I like the idea of balancing out the amount of "actual work"
time we have in each cycle, though I think that aligning with GNOME *does*
matter to us.

On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:29:58PM +0200, Robbie Williamson wrote:
> All the discussion around 10.10.10 and cadence pushed me to take a
> deeper look at the schedule of past releases...to see how close to a
> cadence we actually are.  Interestingly enough, I found that while the
> releases were in the same month (and towards the end), the amount of
> development and bug fix time varied greatly. Here's some pertinent data:
>         
>         9.04 (Jaunty): 25weeks
>         ======================
>         Started: Week of Nov 6th
>         Ended: Week of Apr 23rd
>         * 4 Weeks pre-UDS
>         * 3 Weeks Part-Time Development
>         - I define this as the dip in productivity we see the week
>         after 
>            UDS and during the US/European holiday season
>         * 7 Weeks Full-Time Development through Feature Freeze
>         * 7 Weeks of Bug fixing through FinalFreeze
>         * 2 Weeks of “Cleanup” through Release
>         
>         9.10 (Karmic): 27 weeks
>         =======================
>         Started: Week of Apr 30th
>         Ended: Week of Oct 29th
>         * 4 Week pre-UDS
>         * 1 Week Part-Time Development
>         * 12 Weeks of Full-Time Development through Feature Freeze
>         * 7 Weeks of Bug fixing through FinalFreeze
>         * 2 Weeks of “Cleanup” through Release
>         
>         10.04 (Lucid): 26 weeks
>         =======================
>         Started: Week of Nov 5th
>         Ended: Week of Apr 29th
>         * 2 Weeks pre-UDS
>         * 3 Weeks Part-Time Development
>         * 9 Weeks Full-Time Development through Feature Freeze
>         * 8 Weeks of Bug fixing through FinalFreeze
>         - LTS cycle added an extra Beta, and thus an extra week in bug 
>            fixing
>         * 2 Weeks of “Cleanup” through Release
>         
>         10.10 (Maverick): 26 weeks
>         ==========================
>         Started: Week of May 6th
>         Ends: Week of Oct 28th
>         * 1 Week pre-UDS
>         * 1 Week Part-Time Development
>         * 14 Weeks of Full-Time Development through Feature Freeze
>         * 7 Weeks of Bug fixing through FinalFreeze
>         * 2 Weeks of “Cleanup” through Release
> 
> Assuming we stay on a 26 week schedule, this is what 11.04 looks like:
> 
>         11.04 : 26 weeks
>         ================
>         Starts: Week of Nov 4th
>         Ends: Week of Apr 28th
>         * 2 Week pre-UDS
>         * 4 Weeks Part-Time Development
>         * 9 Weeks of Full-Time Development through Feature Freeze
>         * 7 Weeks of Bug fixing through FinalFreeze
>         * 2 Weeks of “Cleanup” through Release
> 
> So while both cycles are 26wks, we have 14wks of development in 10.10,
> and only 9wk in 11.04...hardly a true "cadence". I propose we adjust our
> schedules to focus on actual development and test time, not simply split
> the 52wks in half.  If we do this, this is what 10.10 and 11.04 look
> like:
> 
>         10.10 (Maverick): 24 weeks
>         ==========================
>         Started: Week of May 6th
>         Ends: Week of Oct 14th
>         * 1 Week pre-UDS
>         * 1 Week Part-Time Development
>         * 12 Weeks of Full-Time Development through Feature Freeze
>         * 7 Weeks of Bug fixing through FinalFreeze
>         * 2 Weeks of “Cleanup” through Release
> 
>     11.04 : 28 weeks
>         ================
>         Starts: Week of Oct 21st
>         Ends: Week of Apr 28th
>         * 1 Week pre-UDS
>         * 4 Weeks Part-Time Development
>         * 12 Weeks of Full-Time Development through Feature Freeze
>         * 7 Weeks of Bug fixing through FinalFreeze
>         * 2 Weeks of “Cleanup” through Release
> 
> Both cycles will have approximately the same amount of pre-UDS,
> development, bug fixing, and cleanup times.  I will point out that the
> schedules ignore the gnome release schedule, and if this is a large
> issue...the proposal breaks.  I'd like to point out that an interesting
> side-effect of this proposal, is that I can make the schedule coloring
> actually relevant, i.e. based on key freeze points in the schedule.
> 
> Now to 10.10.10.  If we accept the proposal and move forward with
> releasing in mid-October and the end of April, a move to releasing on
> 10.10.10 is trivial:
> 
>         10.10.10 (Maverick): 23 weeks
>         =============================
>         Started: Week of May 6th
>         Ends: Week of Oct 14th
>         * 1 Week pre-UDS
>         * 1 Week Part-Time Development
>         * 11 Weeks of Full-Time Development through Feature Freeze
>         * 7 Weeks of Bug fixing through FinalFreeze
>         * 2 Weeks of “Cleanup” through Release
> 
> I've created a proposed schedule for this here:
>         https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MaverickReleaseScheduleProposal
> Based on all this, I feel 10.10.10 is easily achievable and something we
> should take advantage of.  I've attached a pdf slideshow that may help
> illustrate my points better.
> 
> -Robbie
> 
> -- 
> Robbie Williamson                                      robbie at canonical.com 
> Canonical, Ltd.                                   robbiew[irc.freenode.net]                               
> 
> "You can't be lucky all the time, but you can be smart everyday" 
>  -Mos Def
> 
> "Arrogance is thinking you are better than everyone else, while
> Confidence is knowing no one else is better than you." -Me ;)
>                                      


> -- 
> technical-board mailing list
> technical-board at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board


-- 
 - mdz