On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 18:45:11 +0200 Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Ok - that's one problem - we sucks in selective updates and > information for users. > > Other could be - change release scheme: > 1. very similar to current one - rawhide, Fn, Fn-1 > * rawhide - really raw development platform > * Fn - live release, similar to current state but more testing > (proventesters, autoqa) > * Fn-1 - do not touch, even more strict rules Thats what https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy already attempts to impress on maintainers. > advantage - nearly no changes in our current workflow, compromise for > more groups, Fn is live, hq updates but sometimes makes things more > unstable, collateral damage... but slowing down in time (no big > updates Fn+1 - 1 month?), once it hits Fn - it's really fresh but > another 6 months of development - more stable, more bugfixes, happier > users. With current policy - we have two frozen releases, no devs > care anymore, dead and stable in terms - not touched not in > functionality. I'm not sure I follow... you mean rawhide is the way it is now, but F13 would be still open to major changes? > 2. big change > * devel branches - now with GIT - every new feature should be > developed in separate branch -> map it to development instance of > Koji... > * rawhide - merged devel branches with integration testing - fresh > one, similar to current Fedora release - can be used by developers > and power users > - sometimes broken by updates but they know how to deal with this > breakage... I'm not sure how this is different than current rawhide? > * Fn - released one, strict update policy, service packs? - so faster > update cycle? maybe I'm not sure how this is different than the proposed stable updates policy? > 3. combination - I'd like to see devel branches, really and I like Fn > & Fn-1 flexibility from the first example! > > As I already said - I'm not against making Fedora better and more > stable. I just think it's more complicated than just this "less > updates = stable experience = more users" ;-) I agree, but I don't think thats the entire thing thats being proposed. ;) I think it's also more testing, more consideration of _when_ we should do an update, etc. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
