Re: 12.10 upgrade path - Re: Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 06:24:59PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: Perhaps it would make sense to extend 12.10 support by 6 months to give 12.10 users a decent interval to upgrade. Agreed. I understand the desire to cut costs, but giving people zero days to switch over after we didn't tell them our plans [1] in advance of their installing 12.10 seems a bit much to me. I think we would have to eat the cost of supporting 12.10 for a bit longer as the price of not being properly organised about this. [1] And indeed AFAIK didn't have those plans; applying this to 13.04 is a very recent proposal even within Canonical. -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: 12.10 upgrade path - Re: Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
On Friday, March 01, 2013 08:15:13 PM Evan Dandrea wrote: On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 5:36 AM, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote: No would be a good time to be discussing this change for after 14.04. Doing this mid LTS - LTS cycle is going to be problematic for a variety of reasons. I we had a year to get ready, then we might be in a reasonable place to decide on making a transition like this. I emphatically disagree. We have been laying the foundation for exactly this sort of thing for years. You've already read about the extensive testing on jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com, britney, the phasing of updates, the wealth of data from errors.ubuntu.com, changes to update-manager, and many other supporting actors to this that are already in place today or not far off. If we need more than that, lets get off the mailing list and get it written, but lets do it while moving forward. Many of these tools will need to be developed in motion. We wont know how effective they are and what improvements need to be made until we're running them with real data from the rolling release. Personally, I prefer the approach where we figure out what kind of tires we need on the next car and plan for them when we buy the car over an approach where we try to change the tires while the car is in motion. While a lot of work has been done, I think the discussion to date shows that this is no where near completely thought through at the requirements level, let alone a mature concept ready for implementation. I think a reasonable path for moving forward is to plan for transition to a rolling model after 14.04. That doesn't mean work needs to wait, just the we should demonstrably have all the bits in place needed to throw the switch and move to the new development model before the decision to do it is made, not after. Scott K -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: 12.10 upgrade path - Re: Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 06:24:59PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: The proposal is silent on the upgrade path for 12.10 users? Presumably 12.10 - 14.04 LTS upgrades will be supported. Unfortunately, support for 12.10 runs out at just about the same time 14.04 is supposed to be release. Perhaps it would make sense to extend 12.10 support by 6 months to give 12.10 users a decent interval to upgrade. This was the same proposal I'd put forth privately in earlier discussions about this, yes. Trying to do some crazy 12.10-snapshots-14.04 path is madness, 12.04 and 12.10 are quite similar, so update-manager quirks and packaging fixes needed for both to upgrade to 14.04 should be fairly straightforward, and it just makes sense to give users that grace period by extending 12.10 support by three to six months (three was the absolute minimum in my mind, but anything up to six seems fair). ... Adam -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: 12.10 upgrade path - Re: Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
Scott Kitterman [2013-02-28 18:24 -0500]: Perhaps it would make sense to extend 12.10 support by 6 months to give 12.10 users a decent interval to upgrade. +1 on that from me as well, unless it turns out in discussions that we are doing 13.04 after all, and only drop 13.10. Martin -- Martin Pitt| http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org) -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: 12.10 upgrade path - Re: Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
On Friday, March 01, 2013 06:16:18 AM Martin Pitt wrote: Scott Kitterman [2013-02-28 18:24 -0500]: Perhaps it would make sense to extend 12.10 support by 6 months to give 12.10 users a decent interval to upgrade. +1 on that from me as well, unless it turns out in discussions that we are doing 13.04 after all, and only drop 13.10. No would be a good time to be discussing this change for after 14.04. Doing this mid LTS - LTS cycle is going to be problematic for a variety of reasons. I we had a year to get ready, then we might be in a reasonable place to decide on making a transition like this. I think this is a substantially more complex (in terms of understanding all the implications, making sure they are thought through, and including things in the plan - not necessarily just in code) than the No more source packages spec or the archive reorganization spec. How long have those taken? Scott K -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: 12.10 upgrade path - Re: Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
On Friday, March 01, 2013 12:36:43 AM Scott Kitterman wrote: On Friday, March 01, 2013 06:16:18 AM Martin Pitt wrote: Scott Kitterman [2013-02-28 18:24 -0500]: Perhaps it would make sense to extend 12.10 support by 6 months to give 12.10 users a decent interval to upgrade. +1 on that from me as well, unless it turns out in discussions that we are doing 13.04 after all, and only drop 13.10. No would be a good time to be discussing this change for after 14.04. Doing this mid LTS - LTS cycle is going to be problematic for a variety of reasons. If we had a year to get ready, then we might be in a reasonable place to decide on making a transition like this. I think this is a substantially more complex (in terms of understanding all the implications, making sure they are thought through, and including things in the plan - not necessarily just in code) than the No more source packages spec or the archive reorganization spec. How long have those taken? Scott K s/No/Now at the start of the first paragraph. Scott K -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: 12.10 upgrade path - Re: Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
On 02/28/2013 09:36 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: On Friday, March 01, 2013 06:16:18 AM Martin Pitt wrote: +1 on that from me as well, unless it turns out in discussions that we are doing 13.04 after all, and only drop 13.10. Now would be a good time to be discussing this change for after 14.04. Doing this mid LTS - LTS cycle is going to be problematic for a variety of reasons. I we had a year to get ready, then we might be in a reasonable place to decide on making a transition like this. Yes, I'd find the plan more believable with a year to manage an orderly transition. Time to boost quality procedures, time to implement and test parts of the plan and regroup if they don't go as anticipated. (No plan survives first contact with reality.) Allison -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
