Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)

Rick Spencer rick.spencer at canonical.com
Thu Feb 28 19:26:51 UTC 2013


On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Allison Randal <allison at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> On 02/28/2013 07:31 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
> >
> > To succeed at this we will need both velocity and agility. Therefore, I
> > am starting a discussion about dropping non-LTS releases and move to a
> > rolling release plus LTS releases right now.
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> At the moment, this proposal sounds mostly like a handwavey "Do less
> work and get better results. Yay!" I do understand that you're more of a
> traditional manager than a developer, so I'll give it the benefit of the
> doubt and assume you just haven't explained it very well. Could we have
> some developers explain how this model might work, in real-world
> engineering terms?
>
The daily quality parts are well documented in blueprints from the last
several UDSs and we are running them. For handling monthly releases, there
is a proposal on how to do that:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/release-r-monthly-snapshots

Otherwise, it's mostly a matter of stopping doing things.


>
> I'm not entirely opposed to the idea that the Debian development model
> of 2-year "stable" releases with an ongoing "unstable" archive has been
> right all along. But frankly, if someone came to me with this proposal
> you've posted as a "startup" and asked me to invest in it, I'd say "You
> haven't demonstrated that this is technically feasible." and kick them
> back to the drawing board.
>
Oh? I would point to our last several years of improving Daily Quality and
at Raring as it is today. I think our track record for making a highly
usable development release is quite excellent.

Cheers, Rick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20130228/29729e6e/attachment.html>


More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list