I made another post in a different thread about the way I feel the release
cycle should go. After more thinking I do think that I really have the right
idea and here is why...
Going the route of release cycles really does not make this distribution fit
into anything. You going to try and appeal to new people? Ubuntu has
that covered and you will never steal that role. Hoping to become a geek type
distro? There are many that have that covered.
The best thing you can do as a team is try to come up with something that makes
you stand apart from the crowd. I never understood the release cycle model
anyhow, whats the goal of that? To show off the latest tech in the open source
world? Really? With Slackware and Fedora and Suse and hosts of other flavors of
GNU/Linux all doing the same thing?
What do we have that others don't? We have something new that can be great if
planned right. There are 100's of distros releasing in cycles, let's get out of
that and truly showcase the best of open source through:
Unstable branch - absolute latest software here...Rolling unstable - Still
risky but not on the lines of unstableRolling stable - everyday use and very
stable
You could throw in "snapshots" and support those for X amount of time as I have
posted in the other place if you wanted (based on rolling unstable). You could
also have LTS releases based on Rolling stable.... It's up to you.
I don't believe we need yet another "burn new disk every X months for????"
distribution.
