Follow Up from "Let's Discuss Interim Releases"

[Scott Kitterman]

On Saturday, March 09, 2013 02:56:55 PM Phillip Susi wrote:
> On 03/09/2013 12:29 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > One thing I have not seen described (or possibly I missed it - there's
> > been a lot of traffic on this topic) is how the transition from "It's
> > rolling" to "We're getting ready to release an LTS" would happen?
> 
> Yes, there hasn't been much discussion on that yet.  I see two possible
> options:
> 
> 1)  In the say, 3 months leading up to LTS, we impose a freeze.  This
> would be basically what debian does, where they freeze testing, fix
> bugs, then finally release that as the new stable release. Then after
> the stable release, we open a new archive for the next development
> release.  The down side to this is that for that time, new development
> stops.
> 
> 2)  Rather than upload to raring, then freeze, then release raring as
> stable, change the model slightly so we have uploads going to the
> "unstable" release.  Then say, 3 months prior to the deadline for the
> new stable release, we open a new archive for that release, and copy the
> unstable release to it.  Then bugs would be fixed in the stable release,
> while new development can continue concurrently in unstable.

Your option two seems somewhat similar to the situation we end up with now 
when just after release, we don't have a development series and SRUs are 
uploaded to the current release and later forward copied to the development 
version when it's ready.  This can be a pretty labor intensive, error prone 
process.

Scott K