As others pointed out "no change" is the default choice. However, if someone wants to capture our current release cadence and support model to the wiki, I don't see why there would be any objection to that.
Cheers, Rick On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Scott Kitterman <ubu...@kitterman.com> wrote: > Rick Spencer <rick.spen...@canonical.com> wrote: > >>Hi all, >> >>There has been a lot of discussion and impact around the strawman >>proposal for changing our release cadence that I sent last Thursday. >>There was a misconception that the proposal was a decision that I was >>masking as a call for discussion. I want to reassure everyone that I >>really did mean it as a discussion. I feel passionately that we need >>to change and innovate in this area, but a change like this cannot >>succeed, or in fact be made, without discussion in the community and >>proper governance. >> >>Discussion of this topic on the mailing list and at UDS this week was >>wide ranging. There were a lot of divergent opinions and ideas. The >>discussion seems to have resulted in roughly three different forms of >>proposals. >> >>1. Move to a rolling release similar to what I proposed in the >>original straw man. >>2. Continue to release interim releases but only support them until >>roughly the next interim release 6 months later. >>3. Dramatically increase the rate of our releases to, say, once per >>month. >> >>I've attempted to capture the essence of these proposals (and >>associated sub-proposals) along with a structure for points and >>counterpoints in wiki format to support honing and organizing. They >>are currently stubs, so will need detailed content and continued >>honing, but the wiki format invites collaboration on that honing. >> >>See: >>https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReleaseCadence >>https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReleaseCadence/RollingRelease >>https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReleaseCadence/SixMonthInterimRelease >>https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReleaseCadence/TrueMonthlyReleases >> >>I'd like to invite everyone who is interested to get their input into >>these pages by March 18th (or thereabouts). Then I'd like to work with >>interested people to select what we consider the best proposal to take >>to the technical board for guidance. >> >>Part of the straw man proposal was to convert 13.04 into a Rolling >>Release in order to allow us to go faster on the converged OS starting >>immediately. Given the work that is left to achieve a proper proposal >>for the tech board, I don't foresee such a proposal being completed in >>time to make such a radical change to 13.04. > > Maintaining the current cadence should also be one of the options. > > Scott K > > > -- > ubuntu-devel mailing list > ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
