On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Rohan Garg <rohang...@kubuntu.org> wrote: >> Is Framework 5 (et.al) going to be co-installable with KDE4? > > Yes. > >> If yes, why a separate PPA is needed, instead of uploading everything >> into the archive? (even if daily / from git snapshot code) >> > > Because frameworks are just the libraries, the workspace bits are not meant to > be co-installable, which is why there is a need for a separate ISO. > >> Given the desired frequency of releases, which does not align with a >> full ubuntu release cycle. There will be no ability to provide >> security, updates, proposed and backports pockets & PPAs do not have >> such facilities. Given the garbage collection of builds from PPAs and >> image build from a given PPA 3 months ago might no longer have sources >> intact and hence for example require alternative means, e.g. a sources >> image. >> >> In my mind, a released image flavor should have it's sources/binaries >> accessible and frozen + have security/updates/proposed/backports >> streams available for subsequent updates. >> > > However we don't want to call this a flavour, instead we want to call it > a technical preview. Plus, if 1% of the user audience of this ISO > really wants to reproduce > the build, they can grab the packaging from our packaging branch, grab the > tar from download.kde.org and reproduce the build. Sure it's not as > straight forward as apt-get source, however it can still be done. > >> A release every 3 months roughly coincides with a full ubuntu release >> and an alpha-2 release. Thus I'd like to understand why a PPA is >> needed in the first place, and how a following proposal will not work: >> 1) start building daily images out of the archive (however good or >> bad, e.g. see ubuntu-desktop-next daily image builds) >> 2) if desired, "release" them coinciding with available milestones >> (e.g. alphas/betas/rcs/full-releases) with prominent notices about >> limited/reduced support commitments >> >> Or in other words, if it is not ready to go into the archive, then why >> is it ready to build images from? It worries me to build images >> without prior review by ftp-masters or archive-admins and "release" >> them in any shape or form. >> > > We want a ISO because of the following reasons : > > 1) It provides valuable feedback to upstream KDE developers in the > form of bug reports. > > 2) Allows the Kubuntu team to iterate and react faster since we bypass > SRU requirements, > this also has the additional benefit of providing feedback regarding > the quality of upstream > bugfix releases which can be used in future releases as concrete data > for MRE qualifications > > 3) Allows us to provide new feature releases to users without them > having to add the PPA when > by themselves when the 5.1 version of workspaces comes out. This is > not something that can be > achieved with the regular archive > > 4) We want to test integration with the live image system > > 5) We provide packages via a PPA so any packages are already being > published on canonical's servers and > required to be compliant with the licencing requirements of PPAs > > 6) We don't intend to provide upgrade mechanisms for this CD from 14.10 to > 15.04 > > I hope that clears up some of the doubts expressed in the thread so > far. Let me know if you require > more clarifications :) > > Cheers > Rohan Garg
So ... Could we move forward with this? Cheers Rohan Garg -- Ubuntu-release mailing list Ubuntu-release@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
