On Sat, Mar 02, 2013, Robert Collins wrote: > > source.list changes from one monthly to the next. Launchpad series are > > in too many places and would be too expensive to create/update monthly > > I'd like to challenge that. Currently LP series happen every 6 months. > Monthly is only 6 times the frequency.
6 times the frequency is bad in itself, and the difference is more like 24 times the frequency (new series every LTS vs. every month). I'm not intimate with the costs needed on the archive side when opening a new series, so can't go in details about these, but I suppose it ranges from creating new buildd chroots, updating a bunch of scripts, using a lot of disk space to publish a full copy of main + universe etc. There are other costs, such as more painful upgrades for users (sources.list entries need to be updated and reviewed for each repo), PPAs (you need to copy your packages to the new PPA series), and for developers (a bunch of packages need to be updated: debootstrap, pbuilder etc., release upgrade data + tool need to be updated etc.). While each of these could be considered a design flaw that we ought to fix or something that we need to optimize, it's a lot of places/things to fix. > > We need an easy and solid way to switch between monthly and rolling > > though; a bit like the software-properties flags for update frequencies, > > which updates to install etc. > > We should also be sure to gather stats about how much use rolling vs > monthly vs LTS gets, to see if there is actual non-trivial demand for > one vs another (and deal with the 'default sticks' effect too). +1 on stats; in fact whatever we implement we ought to revisit our choice in some time to review how well it fared. -- Loïc Minier -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
