On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:27:52 -0800 (PST), James Buren wrote:
After difficulties we had during 1.6 release cycle, I am proposing a
rule addition. In addition to the freeze we do from rc2 -> stable,
I am proposing we do a new feature and major bump freeze on
everything that is not in a -extra group as its main group after we
are past the pre2 release of a release cycle. The way I feel is,
major changes in the main groups should be implemented by the
time we have pre2 released. This gives us a 2 month period instead of
a mere two weeks to resolve outstanding issues with the
main branch. I don't wish to apply this to anything in extra, as that
has few important packages, and is way too massive for us
to do any real quality control on. Thoughts?

I don't want to say that i was talking about this years ago. I also don't want to say this is one of the main reasons i don't use Frugal on desktop any more. But i've tried several distros, maybe you think about my opinions: - why not freezing after rc1? just because of the time. there can be bugs that are not trivial. freezing after pre2 is a good idea imho - why not excluding xapps? just because most of the users will use packages from xapps. these packages are the most frequent packages, they should work in stable without bugs - the installer should be tested much better. i don't want to give offense to vmiklos, but last time when i used the installer i had to choose a very basic install becasue i ran into strange things - last time when i've seen the text-based installer, all the big desktop environments were choosen by default. you should choose only one default, not all. if this was changed, then sorry. - kernel: i know vmiklos' opionion about this, but the current kernel upgrade mechanism is the worst i've ever seen. i war running into strange problems when i had to pick the installer, chroot into the installed system and hack just because the original, working kernel was deleted and the new kernel wasn't usable. currently the distros use a mechanism where the "kernel" (or whatever they call the package) is only a virtual package that depends on the "kernel-$version" package that contains the kernel itself. if you do an update and the "kernel" package is updated, the system will install a new package with the new kernel and does NOT remove the original, currently working kernel package. i know it can be strange but i think it's still better to remove current-1/current-2/current-N kernels than running into strange things.

Maybe you understand these things, maybe you accept some of them, i'll continue to help the team with anything i can do (mainly sysadmin things).


IroNiQ
--
UNIX/Linux System Administrator
Member of Frugalware Developer Team
_______________________________________________
Frugalware-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://frugalware.org/mailman/listinfo/frugalware-devel

Reply via email to