[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [fab] looking at our surrent state a bit

On Friday 03 November 2006 12:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Late march only once. I asked after FC5 on fedora-devel if we would
> stick to "late march and late September" in the future again (+ some
> delays if needed) and the answer was "no".
> But if we get our release to "round about late march and late September"
> in the future I'd be very glad.

It's something we shoot for, but flexibility is necessary for what we do.

> >>> or more specifically they align their schedule to our releases most
> >>> often.
> >>
> >> And that's why I think we should have a long term release planing like
> >> Ubuntu and Gnome. We don't even have a schedule for FC7 currently, so
> >> GCC or X.org are not able to align their schedule to our releases...
> >
> > Mostly because we don't know how long it will take to accomplish some of
> > the things we want to do.  We don't know what all we want to do this time
> > around and what to punt for the next release.  We're "assuming" roughly 6
> > months, but being strictly tied down by a date kind of sucks for what we
> > want to accomplish this time around.
> I think we should have a slightly more long-term plans. Sure, If release
> X needs a delay, let's delay it a bit. But that should not effect X+1 to
> much.

So screw the next development cycle because we had some problems in the 
current one?  I'd rather not.

> >>> Already stated why this is a very bad idea.  You get a '2' in the name,
> >>> and you get to look at all your broken extensions.  Not fun.
> >>
> >> I'm not saying we need it now. But a good solution for it might be
> >> "We'll ship FF 2.0 as a update for FC6 when it's a bit more matured and
> >> most extensions are ported; so at the end of the year probably. Until
> >> then you can get it in this special FC-6 add-on repo located on ours
> >> servers at ...."
> >
> > How is this any different from what Chris Aillon did, with his FF2 builds
> > made public?
> - was not announced in the public (or I missed it)

I'm pretty sure it hit his blog and one of the fedora lists.

> - there is no "we probably ship it as update soon (when it's ready)"

Because promises suck.  If we determine that FF2 just breaks things too badly 
we might not ever ship it as an update.  Making a promise to or even a hint 
to sets an expectation we may not want to meet.  (and it's a maintainer 
question mostly)

Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora

Attachment: pgpmhtdXtwFQF.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]