Re: [opensuse-factory] Discussion about starting BETA process earlier - by end of sep 2006
Reply on 08-09-2006 17:24:03 <<<> Hi all !
I would like to ask to start the BETA process of openSUSE 10.2 earlier.
Alpha4 now is stable enough to be almost BETA - a few fixes here and there and we are BETA-ready. I think it is not-needed to waste another month of time to get to Alpha5 and then BETA1.
I suggest, that, because we have almost-stable distro now, start the BETA process by end of this month (Sep, 2006), instead of end of next month, and make feature freeze earlier. So our BETA process will last 1 month longer, and in the end deadline (Dec,2006) we (Novell+Community) will be able to deliver a better and more stable OS for day-to-day use.
I want openSUSE 10.2 to be better tested than previous OSes: SUSE Linux 10.0 and 10.1.
What do you think?
I agree. As far as I understand you, the release date should remain the same, just the time for real BUG fixing should be bigger. Only the feature freeze will be earlier. What influences will this have on the planned updates of packets? I mean - Kernel 2.6.18 (is in RC at the moment) - FireFox 2 - k3b 1.0 - Gnome 2.16 (ok, that one is released. I don't see a problem) Will they still be integrated if released upstream AFTER the feature freeze (which in fact would be WRONG). For the kernel this might be ok, as 2.6.18 can be considered as a bugfix of 2.6.18-RC5, but for other things? For k3b for example: I had some mail contact with the author regarding cdrecod / cdrkit. Most probable he will start to support both of them of course slightly shifting a schedule due to the new upcoming license issues. But otherwise, I think everybody agrees that we better spend time on bug fixing with what we have now instead of adding fancy features until the last moment and not having time to test it completely. Dominique
On Friday 08 September 2006 17:29, Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
I agree
I don't. 10.1 had the problems because the zen stuff was added during beta. This won't hapen with 10.2. We don't need to be chickens. Next release will have enough time to bake, considering that the cycle has been lenghtened to 8 months. It sucks to release a distro that was in beta for too long because newer versions of software (kernel, KDE etc) might appear in the mean time, and the distro will seem outdated right at lauch. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Silviu Marin-Caea
On Friday 08 September 2006 17:29, Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
I agree
I don't. 10.1 had the problems because the zen stuff was added during beta. This won't hapen with 10.2. We don't need to be chickens. Next release will have enough time to bake, considering that the cycle has been lenghtened to 8 months.
It sucks to release a distro that was in beta for too long because newer versions of software (kernel, KDE etc) might appear in the mean time, and the distro will seem outdated right at lauch.
I agree with this reasoning. I have another point: We still have a couple of steps to do to make the package manager better. For example, integration of the KDE updater and further speed ups (I doubt it will be blazing fast - for that we need some more time). If you look at the release schedule Alpha5 in four weeks (so early October instead of late September) has already some freezes so that we slow down development. If I callout now a Beta1, we'll get lots of broken stuff since developers get their changes in at the last minute. Let's integrate this a bit smoother... Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, aj@suse.de, http://www.suse.de/~aj/ SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
I agree. As far as I understand you, the release date should remain the same, just the time for real BUG fixing should be bigger. Only the feature freeze will be earlier.
Yes, release date should be normal, Dec, 2006. But Testing perioud should be longer - because both previous versions 10.0 and 10.1 were released with some annoying bugs left. In 10.1 - there was one dumb decision, which I disagree with - change the package-dependency-resolver in the BETA stage. This was a dumb decision because this was very big change that has negative effect on the final release, for *all* the users, so 10.1 was both late and buggy. I want to make this version more deeply tested. This means earlier major feature freeze and better bugfixing. You said about: - Kernel 2.6.18 (is in RC at the moment) This thing will be final before Dec, so I see no problem with this one. - FireFox 2 - k3b 1.0 Here we must ask the teams when they want to release those. If they can assure us that they release their software before RC then we can include their software. BETA versions are exists for both products. We must quick-test those BETA versions. I have quick-tested FFox 2.0 BETA 1 and found no major bugs/regressions compared to FFox 1.5. If the BETA versions of K3b (preview 2) and FFox Beta are *more* stable than previous stable versions (K3b 0.12, FFox 1.5), we can add them safely, if they are less stable let's not add them in 10.2 timeline at all. - Gnome 2.16 (ok, that one is released. I don't see a problem) This thing is final, so I see no problem with this one. Bottom line: If the new software's maintainers assure that final software will be released before RC of openSUSE *and* current Beta versions are "stable enough" it is safe to include those into our BETAs. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
"Alexey Eremenko"
I agree. As far as I understand you, the release date should remain the same, just the time for real BUG fixing should be bigger. Only the feature freeze will be earlier.
Yes, release date should be normal, Dec, 2006.
But Testing perioud should be longer - because both previous versions 10.0 and 10.1 were released with some annoying bugs left.
We have a really long testing period - since the first Alpha. You can test right now. Yes, some things will change - but the early feedback will help us.
In 10.1 - there was one dumb decision, which I disagree with - change the package-dependency-resolver in the BETA stage. This was a dumb decision because this was very big change that has negative effect on the final release, for *all* the users, so 10.1 was both late and buggy.
I think nobody disagrees with you :-)
I want to make this version more deeply tested. This means earlier major feature freeze and better bugfixing.
You said about: - Kernel 2.6.18 (is in RC at the moment) This thing will be final before Dec, so I see no problem with this one. - FireFox 2 - k3b 1.0 Here we must ask the teams when they want to release those. If they can assure us that they release their software before RC then we can include their software. BETA versions are exists for both products. We must quick-test those BETA versions. I have quick-tested FFox 2.0 BETA 1 and found no major bugs/regressions compared to FFox 1.5.
We need much more testing.
If the BETA versions of K3b (preview 2) and FFox Beta are *more* stable than previous stable versions (K3b 0.12, FFox 1.5), we can add them safely, if they are less stable let's not add them in 10.2 timeline at all.
- Gnome 2.16 (ok, that one is released. I don't see a problem) This thing is final, so I see no problem with this one.
Bottom line: If the new software's maintainers assure that final software will be released before RC of openSUSE *and* current Beta versions are "stable enough" it is safe to include those into our BETAs.
Yes, that's what we're trying to do. This way the upstream maintainer gets testing of the betas as well so that they can fix bugs early. Andreas - writing from his openSUSE 10.2 Alpha4 system -- Andreas Jaeger, aj@suse.de, http://www.suse.de/~aj/ SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
participants (4)
-
Alexey Eremenko -
Andreas Jaeger -
Dominique Leuenberger -
Silviu Marin-Caea