Updated release management straw man for TB consideration

[Iain Lane]

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 09:44:28PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 01:33:05 AM Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> ...
> >   * optional newer versions of major, fast-moving and important platform
> >     components. For example, during the life of 12.04 LTS we are
> >     providing as optional updates newer versions of OpenStack, so it is
> >     always possible to deploy 12.04 LTS with the latest OpenStack in a
> >     supported configuration, and upgrade to newer versions of OpenStack
> >     in existing clouds without upgrading from 12.04 LTS itself.
> ...
> 
> On this one point, I'd like to mention that "optional newer version of ... " 
> is exactly what we've oriented backports towards.  Since we've implemented the 
> NotAutomatic feature (I think it was Maverick, but definitely before Precise) 
> we can put newer versions of packages into backports and users only get the 
> newer version when they request it.
> 
> I believe that we have infrastructure and process largely in place to address 
> this point already.

Natty, AFAIK. I'm not sure our current process is up to scratch for
packages with large numbers of rdeps. We can talk about this. I believe
that with some investment (in people), backports could be used to
significantly better effect than it is currently.

Oh, and this bug

  https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/888665

Cheers,

-- 
Iain Lane                                  [ iain at orangesquash.org.uk ]
Debian Developer                                   [ laney at debian.org ]
Ubuntu Developer                                   [ laney at ubuntu.com ]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/attachments/20130312/8bbafdfd/attachment.pgp>