Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
David Henningsson
david.henningsson at canonical.com
Fri Mar 1 06:12:03 UTC 2013
On 02/28/2013 10:06 PM, Robbie Williamson wrote:
> On 02/28/2013 02:49 PM, David Henningsson wrote:
>> On 02/28/2013 05:09 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
>>>> * Keep doing daily quality and keep improving our daily quality.
>>>
>>> Big +1. I'm particularly looking forward to integrating our automatic
>>> package tests with britney.
>>
>> The QA work done in -proposed has increased the productivity for the
>> rest of us, no doubt about that.
>>
>> But still, a word of caution here. Every piece of code even remotely
>> related to the hardware, not only the Linux kernel but also most of the
>> plumbing layer, is quite difficult (or even impossible) to automate
>> testing for. Even if we would set up robots in our lab looking at the
>> screen for artifacts, talking into the microphone and so on, we wouldn't
>> cover the world's hardware.
>>
>> Hardware becomes increasingly complex, diverse, and so testing it takes
>> a lot of time. You can't go test thousands of machines to see if their
>> headphone outputs stopped working every single day.
>>
>> Do we have a plan to deal with those types of bugs?
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but don't we have this problem *now*,
> regardless of a rolling release or not? The only way to reasonably
> solve this is get hardware OEMs to participate, who can't even tolerate
> our 6 month cadence and thus do so on the LTS...which isn't changing.
I think you do have a point there, but let me answer from a different
perspective.
When I was new to Ubuntu, the intuitive thing to do to help out was to
download a beta release, test it, and report bugs. That's what betas are
for, right? Well, I learned that if I did that, the developers were
triaging my bug report around final freeze, and after that there was no
possibility to change anything. I then tried reporting bugs much
earlier, all I would get was a report back two months later, telling me
to test a new version of the package. After a few cycles, I had learned
that the right time to do testing was around feature freeze; when it's
still easy to upload, but the upstream versions have stopped pouring in.
As we now move to a rolling release schedule, when is the right time to
do a wide-scale testing and report bugs? Without just being met with a
"please check if it's fixed in the next version" message?
There is a difference between "daily quality" and "non-LTS release
quality", and a wide-scale hardware testing is one of those things that
make up the difference. This wide-scale hardware testing is not done by
hardware OEMs, but by the community, at least for the larger part.
And; that wide-scale testing in turn benefits the kernel/X packages we
backport into the LTS point releases.
That is not to say I'm against moving to a rolling release; from a poll
on a Swedish news site [1] most of our users seem to like it (73% for,
27% against), I'm just saying that this is a tricky problem we need to
solve somehow, if we can.
--
David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
https://launchpad.net/~diwic
[1]
http://techworld.idg.se/2.2524/1.488083/darfor-kan-ubuntu-1404-bli-den-sista-pa-lang-tid
More information about the ubuntu-devel
mailing list