Release management thoughts for Dapper Drake

[Ante Karamatic]

On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 16:46 +0100, Jeff Waugh wrote:

> Right, that means:
> 
>  a) we follow a normal six month release process, without any specific focus
>     on making the release appropriate for the long term support cycle [1]

We should focus on making release appropriate for long term support. 5
years is a long period. 5 years before today RedHat 7 was released with
gcc-2.95, apache 1.3.12, 2.2.16 kernel being latest of packages. In 3
years after Dapper gets released it will be obsolete (that would be RHEL
2.1).

So (nuking my idea), in your plan is there any place for updates? We
don't want to support distribution that no one will use, but we promised
to support it for 5 years. We have to make dapper attractive when it's
old too :)

I'm comparing time with RedHat cause RHEL is distribution that people
use mostly on their intranet, database, misson critical servers. Of
course, since they have support from RH. But, the point is, you will
have hard time finding someone using RH7 on those machines. Even RHEL2.1
would be almost impossible to find (and only 3,5 years are behind that
distribution).

>  b) we have to wait until October before shipping a long term supported
>     release, while we've committed to doing so in April

That's why I said "I understand this maybe isn't possbile since we are
committed to support both server and desktop when dapper is released.
Maybe to think about it for next "big release"?"

> We can't just follow the same release process and expect to be able to ship
> a long term supportable system. 6.04 will be different, so we need to think
> about it differently.

True. OK.

-- 
Ante Karamatic <ivoks at ubuntu.com>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20051015/72e16f21/attachment-0001.pgp