Xubuntu LTS proposal
cjk at teamcharliesangels.com
Mon Dec 12 14:09:04 UTC 2011
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 11:29:40 +0200
Pasi Lallinaho <pasi at shimmerproject.org> wrote:
> Hey Lionel,
> good to hear your thoughts too.
> On 12/11/2011 03:10 PM, Lionel Le Folgoc wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Thanks for working on this topic.
> > On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 05:27:08AM -0600, Micah Gersten wrote:
> >> So, as discussed around UDS time, we need to make an official request
> >> for Xubuntu to be labeled as an LTS release.
> >> Here are what I think we can sanely commit to:
> >> 3 yr LTS
> >> Milestone image testing i386/amd64 (including point release updates post
> >> release)
> > That's fine to me, as long as people are able to provide testing for so
> > much time (either milestone image or stable release updates).
> As the testing team seems to be quite healthy now, I don't see why this
> wouldn't be possible. Testing team, what are your thoughts?
Since I do the majority of the milestone testing, I don't see any
issues. I already test Ubuntu for the milestones, I can just as easily
test Xubuntu instead.
> >> Best effort High/Critical bug fixes
> > We already do something like that (I can roughly define our current way
> > as: "Remember to fix important bugs in older releases when we have time
> > and didn't forget about them because someone has used the 'nominate for
> > release' button on Launchpad or because many people are complaining on
> > forums or mailing lists").
> > I'm not sure that users are happy with it though, i.e. if they feel that
> > there's no support after a release, or that updates take so much time to
> > be distributed that they had to rely on PPAs (and so we've lost testers
> > for stable release updates).
> I don't see how they would be unhappy. We have a way to file (important)
> bugs in older releases, and if people fail to file them correctly or in
> fair amount of time after they saw the bug, there's not much we can do
> about the bugs, unless we spot them ourselves. As far as I understand,
> our bug triaging works very well too, so that shouldn't be the problem.
> If it's about developers not having enough time, I hope there is more
> communication - espeacially now as we share Xfce with Ubuntu Studio -
> they might be able to fix a number of bugs too.
> >> Best effort security fixes for Xfce related packages
> > There have been very few bugs flagged as security issues in Xfce
> > (CVE-2007-3770 and CVE-2011-1588 are the only recent ones I'm aware of
> > -- also the disputed CVE-2009-4996), so I agree we can commit to that
> > sanely.
> >> This would be made easier if Xubuntu Precise would be aligned with
> >> Debian for their Wheezy release with the same base Xfce version. With a
> >> proposed March 2012 release date for 4.10, it's possible that Debian
> >> could move to that release before their freeze during the summer.
> > Due to the reduced number of active Xfce developers, their release
> > schedule isn't very reliable... That's why I didn't want to target 4.10
> > for precise (Debian has 2 or 3 extra months before their freeze). Now if
> > many people here think the opposite, I don't want to prevent them from
> > working on that goal, we can still go for it. That might imply a buggy
> > release though, with bugs fixed by lots of -proposed/-updates uploads
> > shortly after (similar to what is done for other parts of Ubuntu ;-).
> For the 12.04 LTS, I'd want as stable system as possible, even if that
> meant not pushing 4.10 in, even if it was released (half-baked) on time.
> >> Comments?
> >> Thanks,
> >> Micah
> > Regards,
Linux Registered User Number 425914 [http://counter.li.org/]
Never let anyone steal your DREAM. [http://keepingdreams.com]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the xubuntu-devel