Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1134 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-factory] Status: RC1
- From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:41:50 -0700
- Message-id: <CAHkRx6EWCiuPoHUpfCwjRV6NSLxwnnGMVh8xZYEUbG+7Uwur6g@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Bryen M Yunashko <suserocks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Which is why I made that last post. ;-) Fedora and Ubuntu have clearly
gone down the one path, Debian and Gentoo down the other. openSUSE
*was* on the same path as Fedora and Ubuntu but now we appear to be
evolving independently of *user* expectations, which I think is a
problem.
What do the *users* need? Fedora and Ubuntu seem to be very clear in
setting users' expectations about support, making commitments and
sticking with them unless there are good reasons to slip a date.
Debian is very clear that "Stable" is a perfectionist distro that
won't go out the door until it's dependable and supportable. Gentoo's
"social contract" is similar.
I say we have to do what we can to keep our commitments in the face of
the slips and the disk crashes, and I'm sure the community will. 12.2
will come out some time this year and 11.4 will be supported as long
as it has to be supported. But I don't think it's a matter of tweaking
parameters on how long we support something ... I think it's a more
fundamental decision about users' needs and how to operate to meet
them.
I wish I had solid data on users' needs. I suppose one could scrape
the web for Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian, Gentoo and openSUSE discussions
and apply natural language processing technology to figure that out.
But I'm guessing the openSUSE model doesn't work, the Debian and
Gentoo models work for sophisticated IT users and the Fedora / Ubuntu
model works for "the masses".
If *I* were making the decision, I'd say "let Ubuntu and Fedora fight
it out for the mass market and switch to the Debian / Gentoo model".
Because I think that's the way openSUSE is evolving anyhow - a strong,
sophisticated community of IT users and technologies like Open Build
Service and OpenQA. I'm using openSUSE and not Debian or Gentoo
because of that.
--
Twitter: http://twitter.com/znmeb Computational Journalism Server
http://j.mp/compjournoserver
Data is the new coal - abundant, dirty and difficult to mine.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 12:32 -0700, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
I think this all started when a release was so late that the community
decided to shift from a six-month cycle to an eight-month cycle. We
moved the goalposts. Now we're on an eight-month cycle and are about
to move the goalposts again.
Discussion of moving goalposts may be warranted, but I'll leave that for
the List to discuss it.
Which is why I made that last post. ;-) Fedora and Ubuntu have clearly
gone down the one path, Debian and Gentoo down the other. openSUSE
*was* on the same path as Fedora and Ubuntu but now we appear to be
evolving independently of *user* expectations, which I think is a
problem.
For me, I'm only attempting to re-define the
definition of support here. Because support says "18-months" it clearly
puts us out of sync with any delays or changes in the release-goalpost.
By removing "18-months" and replacing it with "2 months+", we simply
create a very flexible scenario that automatically reacts to actual
releases. Regardless of whether we go six months, 8 months, or 50
years, support of N-2 will always be 2 months+.
I think this is the safest approach and will eliminate any support
discussions similarly if future releases get delayed again.
The only potential future discussions would be if someone wanted to
propose changing "2 months" to some other number of months/years. But
that's an entirely different discussion that involves not only ideal
support cycles, but also whether resources exist to support it.
Bryen
What do the *users* need? Fedora and Ubuntu seem to be very clear in
setting users' expectations about support, making commitments and
sticking with them unless there are good reasons to slip a date.
Debian is very clear that "Stable" is a perfectionist distro that
won't go out the door until it's dependable and supportable. Gentoo's
"social contract" is similar.
I say we have to do what we can to keep our commitments in the face of
the slips and the disk crashes, and I'm sure the community will. 12.2
will come out some time this year and 11.4 will be supported as long
as it has to be supported. But I don't think it's a matter of tweaking
parameters on how long we support something ... I think it's a more
fundamental decision about users' needs and how to operate to meet
them.
I wish I had solid data on users' needs. I suppose one could scrape
the web for Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian, Gentoo and openSUSE discussions
and apply natural language processing technology to figure that out.
But I'm guessing the openSUSE model doesn't work, the Debian and
Gentoo models work for sophisticated IT users and the Fedora / Ubuntu
model works for "the masses".
If *I* were making the decision, I'd say "let Ubuntu and Fedora fight
it out for the mass market and switch to the Debian / Gentoo model".
Because I think that's the way openSUSE is evolving anyhow - a strong,
sophisticated community of IT users and technologies like Open Build
Service and OpenQA. I'm using openSUSE and not Debian or Gentoo
because of that.
--
Twitter: http://twitter.com/znmeb Computational Journalism Server
http://j.mp/compjournoserver
Data is the new coal - abundant, dirty and difficult to mine.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |