Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
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:
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ubuntu-devel