6 weeks delay proposition

Tue Mar 14 17:48:02 GMT 2006

I don't know if this should be discussed at this list, but i just want
to express my very simple opinion:

whatever is decided, i believe a cd should be released in the
scheduled (mid april?) time...

call it ubuntu flight N, RC1, pre-release, or even 6.04 (if the final
is to be 6.05)... just don't release an "enterprise" version.

Anyway, i think this is offftopic for ubuntu-devel, so sorry again.

On 3/14/06, John Augustine <jaugustine at vivnet.net> wrote:
>  Lionel Dricot (aka Ploum) wrote:
> Hello,
>
>  I want to discuss about the 6 weeks delay proposed by Mark Shuttleworth :
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2006-March/000094.html
>
>  The second meeting to talk about this 6 weeks delay is in a few hours but I
> want to write my ideas down before.
>
>  Don't forget to add "IMHO" everywhere in this text. It's just my opinion
> but I sometimes forget to write it.
>
>  Time based release :
>  ----------------------------
>
>  When people have time, they will take it. If there is no deadline, a
> project will take forever or, at least, take a long time. Not because people
> are not working but because they always want something more polished then
> break something else, ...
>  The release of Debian Sarge is a perfect example.
>  That's why a lot of project are now using/switching to a time based
> release.
>
>
>  Ubuntu 6 months process :
>  ------------------------------------
>
>  Ubuntu is now quite famous. The 6 months process is, IMHO, a good part of
> this success : it improves the global quality, it allows people to use
> stable but up-to-date softwares (nearly the bleeding edge) but, more, it's
> predicable ! You can easily schedule upgrade, testing. You can also decide
> to wait a few weeks before migrating a bunch of computers.
>
>  Non-techies users are already looking at screenshots and asking us : "Where
> will we have them ? April ?"  or "You tell me that this annoying bug is
> fixed. When will I have the fix ? April ?".
>
>  Some LUG and Ubuntu communities have also scheduled an event every 6
> months. The traditionnal install parties are becoming install/upgrade
> parties and that's good.
>
>  At first glance, 6 weeks delay seems bad.
>
>
>  Dapper Drake Enterprise :
>  ---------------------------------
>
>  As Mark said, Dapper Drake is very special because it's the first
> Enterprise ready Ubuntu edition (with DVD collector, director's cut edition,
> isn't it ?). It seems good to add more polish and more testing since it will
> have a longer support life.
>
>  At first glance, 6 weeks delay seems good.
>
>
>  Just adding a 6 week delay ?
>  -------------------------------------
>
>  What if we just add a 6 weeks delay ? It would be, IMHO, wrong.
>  1) Just adding 6 weeks will not add that much quality. A lot of contributor
> will think : "Ok, so I'm cool for 6 weeks more before the rush". There will
> be lot of discussion for 6 weeks more (Must we add NM with WPA support ?
> With the new theme, my desktop glows in the dark ! ...)
>  2) It would be a big deception for a big part of the community. People that
> are waiting Dapper to install it on their desktop, scheduled install
> parties, ...
>  3) There would be no more beta-testers than usual. Only usual contributors
> and testers will install and report bugs against the intermediate flight CD.
>  The biggest problem with the Breezy release was hardware oddities. With
> only a 6 weeks delay, we will not expand the testing field.
>
>  But :
>  1) Dapper obviously needs more polishing/testing thant Breezy and Hoary.
>
>
>  What can we choose ?
>  -----------------------------
>
>  As usual in this kind of problem, the solution is nor black or white -
> insert here random Confucius quote - but in the middle.
>  So I suggest the following :
>
>  - Let release Dapper as usual, without any delay. Community will be very
> happy.
>  - Call this Dapper : "Community Edition" or something like that.
>  - Leave Dapper frozen for 6 weeks.
>  - In this timeframe, collect all the new bugs from install parties, new
> users, users with strange hardware and so one.
>  - Choose carefully wich bugs must be really solved in Dapper.
>  - 6 weeks later, release : "Dapper Enterprise edition" and print CDs.
>
>  I don't know if this kind of solution is realistic or not, but it would
> make nearly everyone happy, IMHO.  More, it would make a lot of people
> beta-testers of the Enterprise edition.
>
>  But, in respect of the community, it seems very important to me to release
> this "Community edition" as a normal release, not a beta one. It will not
> warn you against installing it or possible data loss. It could be installed
> on a beginner's computer. It *is* a release. The special would not be this
> community edition but the enterprise one, the same release with just a
> little more love.
>
>
>  Thank you for reading, any comment is welcome. See you at the meeting :-)
>
>
>  Lionel  (ploum on IRC)
>
>  I agree with this for the most part.  Delaying Dapper for 6 weeks to
> release an Enterprise version of an OS that is, for the most part, an end
> user OS.
>
>  I totally agree with releasing a "Community Edition", however, this should
> simply be Dapper, no special names, and 6 weeks later, the "Dapper
> Enterprise" edition should be released.
>
>  I've been testing/using Dapper since Flight 1(the Southbridge of my new MB
> requires drivers only included in the most up-to-date installation CDs, like
> Dapper or FC5) and I really haven't seen any reason lately showing this
> release needs any kind of a delay.
>
>  Also, I feel that pushing the release and calling it an "Enterprise"
> edition, will steer desktop users toward Breezy, or other systems, which may
> not have the most up-to-date combination of stable software.
>
>  All of this is IMHO as a loyal Debian/Ubuntu user.  I want what's best for
> the comminuty/OS, and I really believe that releasing Dapper(standard
> desktop edition) on schedule(or a week or so off) is in the best interest of
> developers and users.  I also must agree that the "Enterprise" edition is an
> excellent idea because Ubuntu seems to be missing in that department, but
> this shouldn't conflict with the standard release(IMO).
>
>  I'm sure that what is decided upon will be what's truly best for Dapper,
> but I wanted to put my 2 cents in as a user.  So please don't judge this too
> harshly.
>
> --
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
>
>
>

--
João Inácio
http://www.jcinacio.com