Hi Scott (2013.02.28_01:30:12_+0200)
Since Launchpad was open sourced there's been no requirement to use
proprietary web services to be involved in Ubuntu development
Worse than that, proprietary local client.
I guess I'll discover how good/bad G+ is next week...
SR
--
Stefano Rivera
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Stefano Rivera stefa...@ubuntu.com wrote:
and for community members who have been caught off-guard and aren't
able to participate this time, they'll still be able to get the videos
of the discussions online, and three months from now be in a position
to
= tl;dr =
Ubuntu has an amazing opportunity in the next 7-8 months to deliver a Phone
OS that will be widely adopted by users and industry while also putting
into place the foundation for a truly converged OS.
To succeed at this we will need both velocity and agility. Therefore, I am
starting a
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Aurélien Gâteau agat...@kde.org wrote:
Le Tuesday 26 February 2013 23:00:45 Harald Sitter a écrit :
Clearly Canonical is encouraging us to increase upstream transparency, so
it only makes sense that we should all attend Akademy to discuss directly
with our
ftr, I didn't mean Friday the 27th, I mean Friday the 1st, tomorrow ;)
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Rick Spencer rick.spen...@canonical.comwrote:
= tl;dr =
Ubuntu has an amazing opportunity in the next 7-8 months to deliver a
Phone OS that will be widely adopted by users and industry
Hello Rick,
Rick Spencer [2013-02-28 7:31 -0800]:
Therefore, I think we should keep LTS releases, but starting now, stop
doing interim releases and start a rolling release.
FWIW, I'm all for this. The past two cycles have demonstrated a
tremendous increase in daily quality, and starting a RR
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 05:09:26 PM Martin Pitt wrote:
* Take a monthly snapshot of the development release, which we support
only until the next snapshot
This is the main point where I have doubts and questions:
* What does support mean for the monthly snapshots? Hopefully
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Aurélien Gâteau agat...@kde.org wrote:
AFAIK Kubuntu policy is to get all patches reviewed upstream.
That and also a as-few-patches-as-possible policy. There was a bit of
slacking there recently so we have a pile of patches that are either not
reviewed by
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 04:35:14 PM Aleix Pol wrote:
If Kubuntu wants to strength links with KDE, a good start would be to
actually trust KDE maintainers on which are stable versions.
What does this mean? Since KDE 4.4 we've shipped every KDE point release.
Sometimes we get behind
Wow!
We've come a long way in the past few years. Let me just say I could
not be more excited by this.
There are undoubtably challenges ahead if we are to ensure the level
of quality people have come to expect from Ubuntu, but I take comfort
in knowing that after lots of hard work by everyone
Wouldn't a fix be as easy as enforcing linux-headers-generic on the ISO
image and/or at the initial OS installation?
On 22 Feb 2013 13:25, Scott Ritchie scottritc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
I've been absolutely flooded with informal reports over a period of
several months now of 12.10 being still
On 13-02-28 11:23 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 05:09:26 PM Martin Pitt wrote:
* Take a monthly snapshot of the development release, which we support
only until the next snapshot
This is the main point where I have doubts and questions:
* What does support
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 07:31:49 AM Rick Spencer wrote:
...
= Role of the Interim Releases =
But what about the 3 releases we do every six months in between (what I
call the interim releases)? Who are they for? Why do we invest so much in
supporting multiple interim releases at a time?
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Evan Dandrea
evan.dand...@canonical.com wrote:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PhasedUpdates
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ErrorTracker/PhasedUpdates
+1 for this, this makes the entire idea much more robust and would let
us at least use data to measure the end user updates.
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:29:45 AM Marc Deslauriers wrote:
On 13-02-28 11:23 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 05:09:26 PM Martin Pitt wrote:
* Take a monthly snapshot of the development release, which we support
only until the next snapshot
This is
On 13-02-28 10:31 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
To succeed at this we will need both velocity and agility. Therefore, I
am starting a discussion about dropping non-LTS releases and move to a
rolling release plus LTS releases right now.
YES! :P
= Role of the LTS Releases =
Many users prefer
Along with no UDS this feels like a further move away from being a community
project for Ubuntu.
After much time lobbying KDE (and other upstreams) to move to 6
monthly releases that has been working nicely for some years but if we
lose that cadance we will be in danger of losing a lot of what
Marc Deslauriers [2013-02-28 11:29 -0500]:
The security team does support the development release. When we push
updates for the stable release, our policy is to either sync, merge or
fix the packages in the dev release also.
That has been my impression as well. I would think that often this
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 05:49:46 PM Martin Pitt wrote:
Marc Deslauriers [2013-02-28 11:29 -0500]:
The security team does support the development release. When we push
updates for the stable release, our policy is to either sync, merge or
fix the packages in the dev release also.
On 13-02-28 11:32 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:29:45 AM Marc Deslauriers wrote:
On 13-02-28 11:23 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 05:09:26 PM Martin Pitt wrote:
* Take a monthly snapshot of the development release, which we support
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 07:31:49AM -0800, Rick Spencer wrote:
Therefore, I think we should keep LTS releases, but starting now, stop
doing interim releases and start a rolling release.
Many people gave up a week of their lives to plan Raring and have been
working on it for the last 4
Thanks Rick. I applaud this proposal.
This definitely helps to reaffirm the decision that we made with Mythbuntu
to move to LTS only for our releases. We have had an incredibly positive
response within our sub-community with the decision.
I look forward to hearing more about how this will
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 07:31:49 AM Rick Spencer wrote:
More clearly, I think we should:
* Stop making interim releases.
* Keep doing daily quality and keep improving our daily quality.
* Take a monthly snapshot of the development release, which we support
only until the next
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 04:58:27 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 07:31:49AM -0800, Rick Spencer wrote:
Therefore, I think we should keep LTS releases, but starting now, stop
doing interim releases and start a rolling release.
Many people gave up a week of
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 07:31:49 AM Rick Spencer wrote:
Daily Quality means that developers can ensure their components are stable
and useful before they upload, and our processes protect us from most
mistakes these days. The result is that 13.04 has been as robust a release
over the
On 28 February 2013 16:31, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
This may be true for Canonical and the Ubuntu desktop, but I strongly believe
it's not the case for Kubuntu. For me, a Kubuntu release means the most
current KDE. I generally run the latest regular release and I think that
On Feb 28, 2013, at 05:09 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
FWIW, I'm all for this. The past two cycles have demonstrated a
tremendous increase in daily quality, and starting a RR now will only
motivate everyone to get even better.
I'm all for it too, as it pretty much mirrors how I actually use and
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 12:07:02 PM Jeremy Bicha wrote:
On 28 February 2013 16:31, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
This may be true for Canonical and the Ubuntu desktop, but I strongly
believe it's not the case for Kubuntu. For me, a Kubuntu release means
the most
Hey
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Martin Pitt wrote:
This entails also dropping freezes for the non-LTS cycles, or would we
still have freeze cycles during the monthly cadence?
Trying to think in the spirit of rolling, let's try to keep things as
releasable as possible every day! :-) If we
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 11:44:47 -0500
Marc Deslauriers marc.deslauri...@canonical.com wrote:
That means users could choose:
* The LTS release
* The rolling release updated daily or as frequently as desired
* The rolling release updated at least monthly
I like the monthly snapshot idea. It
Nice work, Wookey! If experience cross-building for armhf is any guide,
all you need for NSS is a host build of shlibsign; see
https://github.com/mkedwards/crosstool-ng/blob/master/patches/nss/3.12.10/0001-Modify-shlibsign-wrapper-for-cross-compilation.patch.
There's also scriptage in that repo
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Martin Pitt wrote:
So if the last monthly is supposed to actually be a kind of a
release, instead of just a blessed daily installation image, this
would mean that there would be a new series each month?
New series are super expensive to create, need coordination in a
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Will they start getting USN coverage?
Good point; I've added that as a question in the bp[1]
thanks,
[1]
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/release-r-monthly-snapshots
--
Loïc Minier
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Mario Limonciello wrote:
Currently LTS point releases are bringing in HW
backports from the previous 6 month release. Will they keep a similar
schedule and pick up the current development release snapshot?
ack; added in the middle of:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:59:36AM -0600, Mario Limonciello wrote:
Thanks Rick. I applaud this proposal.
This definitely helps to reaffirm the decision that we made with Mythbuntu
to move to LTS only for our releases. We have had an incredibly positive
response within our sub-community
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Has there been any technical discussion about how this would work? If so,
can
we have a pointer to it?
Adam and Colin were kind enough to bounce some ideas some days ago to
prepare:
As one of the user base I hope I can reply here.
I use kubuntu dev version so I can always be up to date with the latest and
greatest. Especially the latest version of kde. You guys (kubuntu devs)
rock and I always look forward to the next update. I do various bug reports
when I can but I don't
This is awesome news!
When I first proposed it 18-months ago, I was convinced it was the right
thing to improve Ubuntu's quality and the pace of development at the same
time.
I'm excited about this announcement!
Scott
--
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen? Are you
On 28/02/13 15:31, Rick Spencer wrote:
= tl;dr =
Ubuntu has an amazing opportunity in the next 7-8 months to deliver a
Phone OS that will be widely adopted by users and industry while also
putting into place the foundation for a truly converged OS.
To succeed at this we will need both
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:44:47AM -0500, Marc Deslauriers wrote:
== For Core/MOTU Developers ==
For the people who are actually making Ubuntu (the people on this thread
I hope) there are some clear wins as well.
1. Only 2 releases to support, the LTS and the rolling releases. That
On 02/28/2013 10:53 AM, Marc Deslauriers wrote:
On 13-02-28 11:32 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:29:45 AM Marc Deslauriers wrote:
On 13-02-28 11:23 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 05:09:26 PM Martin Pitt wrote:
* Take a monthly snapshot
On 28 February 2013 17:05, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 07:31:49 AM Rick Spencer wrote:
Daily Quality means that developers can ensure their components are stable
and useful before they upload, and our processes protect us from most
mistakes these
On 02/28/2013 10:23 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 05:09:26 PM Martin Pitt wrote:
* Take a monthly snapshot of the development release, which we support
only until the next snapshot
This is the main point where I have doubts and questions:
* What does support
On 02/28/2013 10:49 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
Marc Deslauriers [2013-02-28 11:29 -0500]:
We will also be pushing urgent security updates to monthly snapshot users.
So if the last monthly is supposed to actually be a kind of a
release, instead of just a blessed daily installation image, this
On 28 February 2013 17:16, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 12:07:02 PM Jeremy Bicha wrote:
On 28 February 2013 16:31, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
This may be true for Canonical and the Ubuntu desktop, but I strongly
believe it's not
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 06:26:08PM +, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 09:53:12AM -0800, Scott James Remnant wrote:
I'm excited about this announcement!
I remember when Canonical did discussions in Ubuntu not just announcements
to it.
The subject of this thread is
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 06:17:17PM +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
[emphasis mine]
But just like debian we know have britney, together with many
automatic adt tests which we run on all reverse dependencies in
jenkins. Uploading beta version of software into sid has never been
welcomed and by
On 02/28/2013 07:31 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
To succeed at this we will need both velocity and agility. Therefore, I
am starting a discussion about dropping non-LTS releases and move to a
rolling release plus LTS releases right now.
Hi Rick,
At the moment, this proposal sounds mostly like a
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs
dmitrij.led...@ubuntu.com wrote:
But just like debian we know have britney, together with many
automatic adt tests which we run on all reverse dependencies in
jenkins. Uploading beta version of software into sid has never been
welcomed and by
On 02/28/2013 01:02 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
Of course, there are some elements of this that are entirely for
Canonical to decide. For instance, it's Canonical's decision whether
or not it's going to fund security support for 6-monthly releases. As
ScottK mentions up-thread, it's doubtful
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Allison Randal alli...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 02/28/2013 07:31 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
To succeed at this we will need both velocity and agility. Therefore, I
am starting a discussion about dropping non-LTS releases and move to a
rolling release plus LTS
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:25:16AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 04:35:14 PM Aleix Pol wrote:
If Kubuntu wants to strength links with KDE, a good start would be to
actually trust KDE maintainers on which are stable versions.
What does this mean? Since KDE
On 02/28/2013 01:02 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 06:26:08PM +, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 09:53:12AM -0800, Scott James Remnant wrote:
I'm excited about this announcement!
I remember when Canonical did discussions in Ubuntu not just
On 02/28/2013 11:26 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
The daily quality parts are well documented in blueprints from the last
several UDSs and we are running them. For handling monthly releases,
there is a proposal on how to do that:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Jonathan Riddell j...@jriddell.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:25:16AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 04:35:14 PM Aleix Pol wrote:
If Kubuntu wants to strength links with KDE, a good start would be to
actually trust KDE
On 28 February 2013 14:33, Micah Gersten mic...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Yes, but our britney doesn't delay migration to allow for testing of the
built packages or block based on RC bugs filed. I see us getting to the
point at some time in the future of being more stable than testing in a
rolling
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Jamie Strandboge wrote:
On 02/28/2013 01:53 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
I suspect there's a good chance that if we all work on the technical
details together as a hypothetical reality,
isn't that what next week is for?
I guess we don't know(tm) as:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The six-monthly Ubuntu release cycle is exciting for Ubuntu fans, KDE
fans, and (lesserly) Gnome fans ... and awful for pretty much everyone
else.
It's awful for first-time users trying to choose a version, for ISVs,
for OEMs and ODMs, for people who
On 02/28/2013 02:11 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
On 28 February 2013 14:33, Micah Gersten mic...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Yes, but our britney doesn't delay migration to allow for testing of the
built packages or block based on RC bugs filed. I see us getting to the
point at some time in the future of
On 02/28/2013 02:13 PM, Paul Sladen wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Jamie Strandboge wrote:
On 02/28/2013 01:53 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
I suspect there's a good chance that if we all work on the technical
details together as a hypothetical reality,
isn't that what next week is for?
I guess
Hi mpt,
A lot of points in here. Some follow up thoughts ...
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Matthew Paul Thomas m...@canonical.comwrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The six-monthly Ubuntu release cycle is exciting for Ubuntu fans, KDE
fans, and (lesserly) Gnome fans
On 02/28/2013 03:13 PM, Paul Sladen wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Jamie Strandboge wrote:
On 02/28/2013 01:53 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
I suspect there's a good chance that if we all work on the technical
details together as a hypothetical reality,
isn't that what next week is for?
I guess
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 06:17:17 PM Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
On 28 February 2013 17:05, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 07:31:49 AM Rick Spencer wrote:
Daily Quality means that developers can ensure their components are
stable
and useful
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:26:51 AM Rick Spencer wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Allison Randal alli...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 02/28/2013 07:31 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
To succeed at this we will need both velocity and agility. Therefore, I
am starting a discussion about
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 02:04:31 PM Jamie Strandboge wrote:
On 02/28/2013 01:53 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
On 02/28/2013 11:26 AM, Rick Spencer wrote:
I suspect there's a good chance that if we all work on the technical
details together as a hypothetical reality, we can achieve a
On 28 February 2013 15:58, Allison Randal alli...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Depends on what actually gets discussed next week. A single hour-long
session on cadence isn't going to help much. A whole bunch of sessions
exploring every aspect of the Ubuntu development model that would be
impacted by a
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 03:11:27 PM Jeremy Bicha wrote:
On 28 February 2013 14:33, Micah Gersten mic...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Yes, but our britney doesn't delay migration to allow for testing of the
built packages or block based on RC bugs filed. I see us getting to the
point at some
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Paul Sladen ubu...@paul.sladen.org wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Jamie Strandboge wrote:
On 02/28/2013 01:53 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
I suspect there's a good chance that if we all work on the technical
details together as a hypothetical reality,
isn't that
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 12:59:19 PM Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 03:11:27PM -0500, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
On 28 February 2013 14:33, Micah Gersten mic...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Yes, but our britney doesn't delay migration to allow for testing of the
built packages or block
On 28 February 2013 20:57, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 06:38:41 PM Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
On 28 February 2013 17:16, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 12:07:02 PM Jeremy Bicha wrote:
On 28 February 2013
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 04:16:57PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I do think that while 75% of the archive is imported unmodified from
Debian, the vast majority of these packages are in the long tail that
both a) don't individually have many users in Ubuntu, and b) don't have
anyone paying
On 02/28/2013 12:49 PM, David Henningsson wrote:
On 02/28/2013 05:09 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
* Keep doing daily quality and keep improving our daily quality.
Big +1. I'm particularly looking forward to integrating our automatic
package tests with britney.
The QA work done in -proposed has
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rick Spencer wrote on 28/02/13 20:41:
...
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Matthew Paul Thomas
...
So, I'm all in favor of having two-yearly releases. But for the
same reasons as six-monthly releases are bad, monthly snapshots
and/or a
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 01:38:28 PM Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 04:16:57PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I do think that while 75% of the archive is imported unmodified from
Debian, the vast majority of these packages are in the long tail that
both a) don't
On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 11:59 -0500, Marc Deslauriers wrote:
On 13-02-28 11:49 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
I would expect users to upgrade to the latest packages of the RR each
time update-notifier pops up, regardless of which medium they used to
install. After a month this needs to happen
On 22/02/13 04:24, Scott Ritchie wrote:
I've been absolutely flooded with informal reports over a period of
several months now of 12.10 being still broken with regards to
proprietary drivers.
Reports like this are typical, especially after the influx of steam users:
Installed ubuntu +
On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 16:00 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 11:26:51 AM Rick Spencer wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Allison Randal alli...@ubuntu.com wrote:
I'm not entirely opposed to the idea that the Debian development model
of 2-year stable
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 28/02/13 19:03, Steve Langasek wrote:
Yes, with my SRU hat I'm in complete agreement here. Unverified
SRUs for interim releases every time we do an SRU to an LTS are a
constant source of frustration for me, and make it starkly clear
that
On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 17:09 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
More clearly, I think we should:
* Stop making interim releases.
This entails also dropping freezes for the non-LTS cycles, or would we
still have freeze cycles during the monthly cadence?
I hope that we will. My biggest worry with
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Alex Chiang wrote:
If you want to avoid the daily grind, press the close button when
update-manager fires. Or set the 'check for updates' frequency to
monthly. I think the intended audience for monthly images could
handle that workflow.
If you want to avoid the extra
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Loïc Minier loic.min...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Alex Chiang wrote:
If you want to avoid the daily grind, press the close button when
update-manager fires. Or set the 'check for updates' frequency to
monthly. I think the intended audience for
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
On 28 February 2013 23:15, Mario Limonciello supe...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Loïc Minier loic.min...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Alex Chiang wrote:
If you want to avoid the daily grind, press the close button when
update-manager fires. Or set the
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.
hi,
On Do, 2013-02-28 at 20:14 +, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
So, I'm all in favor of having two-yearly releases. But for the same
reasons as six-monthly releases are bad, monthly snapshots and/or a
rolling release would be much worse -- unless we are careful to
communicate that they are
Removed from sponsors queue (WIP/unsubbed) due to issues needing resolved:
*
https://code.launchpad.net/~danilo/ubuntu/raring/command-not-found/python2-package/+merge/149494
*
https://code.launchpad.net/~logan/ubuntu/raring/piuparts/0.49ubuntu1/+merge/149918
*
On Feb 28, 2013, at 05:01 PM, Ted Gould wrote:
I hope that we will. My biggest worry with the rolling release
methodology is that there is no deadlines for people to work towards
except the LTS deadlines. This will then encourage more polishing and
refining, with a rush to an even bigger
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Mario Limonciello wrote:
What about a rolling static base instead? Do a unionfs (or similar) on top
of it. Deliver an encompassing image from month to month. Turn off apt as
a mechanism to deliver updates. But allow it to be turned back on. Even
if you don't install
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Loïc Minier loic.min...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Mario Limonciello wrote:
What about a rolling static base instead? Do a unionfs (or similar) on
top
of it. Deliver an encompassing image from month to month. Turn off apt
as
a mechanism to
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 02:05:35PM -0800, Alex Chiang wrote:
The monthly snapshots would be for users who want the fresh
software, but don't want to manage the daily grind of updating
to ensure that their system is secure. The way I think of it is
that we support 2 cadences for updates,
On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 12:39:58AM +0100, Oliver Grawert wrote:
hi,
On Do, 2013-02-28 at 20:14 +, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
So, I'm all in favor of having two-yearly releases. But for the same
reasons as six-monthly releases are bad, monthly snapshots and/or a
rolling release would
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/28/2013 04:55 PM, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
That's a worst-case scenario for Ubuntu as a platform. The type of
users most likely to install applications, not doing so, because
they're using an Ubuntu version that changes too often for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/28/2013 06:01 PM, Ted Gould wrote:
On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 17:09 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
More clearly, I think we should: * Stop making interim
releases.
This entails also dropping freezes for the non-LTS cycles, or
would we still have
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 10:04:19 PM Michael Hall wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/28/2013 04:55 PM, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
That's a worst-case scenario for Ubuntu as a platform. The type of
users most likely to install applications, not doing so,
Ted Gould [2013-02-28 16:52 -0600]:
While I realize that the mechanism is yet undecided, but it is important
that if we are doing release, and expect people to use them, that we do
upgrade testing between those. This isn't really more work than having
a 6 monthly release, but we shouldn't let
Loïc Minier [2013-02-28 18:18 +0100]:
Trying to think in the spirit of rolling, let's try to keep things as
releasable as possible every day! :-)
Indeed, I thought that was the whole point why we are doing a RR now.
If we really have a bad issue
the day we intend to take a snapshot, then
David Henningsson [2013-02-28 21:49 +0100]:
But still, a word of caution here. Every piece of code even remotely
related to the hardware, not only the Linux kernel but also most of
the plumbing layer, is quite difficult (or even impossible) to
automate testing for. Even if we would set up
Loïc Minier [2013-02-28 18:27 +0100]:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013, Martin Pitt wrote:
So if the last monthly is supposed to actually be a kind of a
release, instead of just a blessed daily installation image, this
would mean that there would be a new series each month?
New series are super
On Friday, March 01, 2013 05:50:35 AM Martin Pitt wrote:
David Henningsson [2013-02-28 21:49 +0100]:
But still, a word of caution here. Every piece of code even remotely
related to the hardware, not only the Linux kernel but also most of
the plumbing layer, is quite difficult (or even
On 02/28/2013 11:03 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
Micah Gersten [2013-02-28 13:33 -0600]:
Yes, but our britney doesn't delay migration to allow for testing of the
built packages or block based on RC bugs filed.
Not on RC bugs, but we can still block them manually. Pinging any
release team member
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
