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

[Ted Gould]

On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 16:00 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:

> On Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:26:51 AM Rick Spencer wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Allison Randal <allison at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > > 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.
> 
> The current approach to daily quality has never been tried when Debian wasn't 
> in freeze.  Declaring things good now based on the available data is like a 
> penguin on an iceberg as it floats north being convinced the data so far 
> proving he's riding on a stable, reliable platform.


And also when Unity and Compiz have only been receiving bug fix work,
not major feature development.  I think that we have improved daily
quality overall, but Raring itself is not enough data to say it is
equivalent to the six month releases.

Ted

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20130228/a61b4764/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20130228/a61b4764/attachment-0001.pgp>