Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1134 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] Calling for a new openSUSE development model
  • From: todd rme <toddrme2178@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:51:41 +0200
  • Message-id: <CADb7s=sH88iegqUVRj0osQH6saV2_RS8Ps-o==X_BCnxbHvGqg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Henne Vogelsang <hvogel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hey,


On 14.06.2012 13:30, Jos Poortvliet wrote:

On Thursday 14 June 2012 12:52:49 todd rme wrote:

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Stephan Kulow<coolo@xxxxxxx>  wrote:

3. As working more strictly will require more time, I would like to
 either ditch release schedules all together or release only once a
 year and then rebase Tumbleweed - as already discussed in the RC1
 thread.


What if we do it the other way around?  We have Tumbleweed as the
"official" openSUSE version


So, in a sense, Factory becomes a unstable repo for Tumbleweed and we
release stabilized snapshots of Tumbleweed. And we maintain those, then.


Whats the difference to what we do today?

Factory is unstable for openSUSE and we release stabilized snapshots of
openSUSE. And we maintain those, then.

Essentially it's replacing one name (openSUSE) with another name
(Tumbleweed) for the same thing (stabilized Factory) :D

The difference is that the rolling distribution would be expected to
be stable while Factory is not. To put it in terms of our current
structure, openSUSE released would be pulled from Tumbleweed rather
than Factory.

The point of the releases is that it would have fixed package
versions, it would get bugfix-only improvements for a certain period
of time. It would also have branding changes, and would provide an
opportunity to make more core changes that are difficult under the
rolling-release model.

-Todd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
This Thread
Follow Ups