Discussion about release cycle (comments)

[wobo]

Several points jumped through my synapses reading Trio3b's post.

A thought I had many times before: are the users ready for such Linux distributions? I do not mean any technical skills, no user is supposed to learn how to create scripts and configure things by editing config files any more. But I often see that users lack the mindset, the way of thinking which is required by administrating your own *nix system. One nice example was the KDE switch to 4.x which Trio3b described as fiasco. But was this fiasco not really caused by the users demand for "the latest" although KDE stated that 4.0 (and a few following versions) were not for userland? With the proper mindset users without development skills would have stayed away from KDE 4 until it was declared as "userland-ready", which was with 4.2 [1]. This is just one example but could also be ported to other "fiascos".

As often said, Linux is a system which forces the user to be a sysadmin as well - but as a sysadmin you think different than a user does. IMHO this is one point which is not communicated enough to the user. Of course, marketing would have a fit seeing the question "Are you ready to be a sysadmin?" all over the portal site of our Linux distribution. But isn't this really the question here when we talk about backports, updates, rolling releases and all the rest? These are expressions and tasks for a sysadmin, not a user.

In business we do have IT departments and sysadmins who care for those things - your average Dilbert in his cubicle is not supposed to care for updates. But for the user at home we see this dual personality with the different mindsets to be a given fact. Is that so?

As you can see, I did not aim at a certain conclusion here, I just let my thoughts roam free (could well be an exposé for a editor's article).

[1] Of course, for the real "fiasco" we have to blame a certain distribution as well which could not wait to be "the first to offer the new KDE!" and thus caused other distributions to follow.

[magnus]

I think the whole discussion is dominated by "technical" users.
I, as a simple user, need a stable, secure system where I can use my applications.

Gnome 2, 3, 4 ??? KDE 4.6, 4. 7, 5.0 ??? What does it matter.
At the office a must use a system called xp, but for our 10.000 girls and boys it runs stable.
That's it.

I admit, this is a very simple view.
But for me and a lot of users a very important criterion.
I don`t believe this can provide a "rolling release" (in the moment).

So I prefer a a reasonable release cycle with enough time for the development and the qa.
For example, a new release every nine months brings me the new developments, not just the latest.
But I can also update my system with a clear conscience and without great risks.

The technicans can play with cauldron and the latest developments

Magnus

[isadora]

Must admit magnus is right about the difference between "technical" and "regular"-users.
Today i started adding the cauldron-repositories, and did a first update to my test-Mageia.
The first bunch of packages (about 40) went without a hassle through MCC.
But then MCC stopped functioning, and i had to change to konsole to get in the other 600.
Due to a sloppy internet-connection, i had to restart the updating-process twice, and in the end i was missing four packages.
I managed to install them all in the end, but you have to be familiar with the command-line.

[magnus]

Today i started adding the cauldron-repositories, and did a first update to my test-Mageia.

Today I have done the same job.
about 20 minutes - good internet connection and ssd
(In the past ELP had a song "Lucky man")

one package has a missing signature

....... but you have to be familiar with the command-line.

I think for Cauldron is the command-line with "urpmi --auto-update" the better way for updates

[isadora]

Emerson, Lake and Palmer, those were the days!!!!!!!!!!!

And yes, i used urpmi --auto-select, gave me an overview what was going to be installed and the possibility to agree (or not of course).

[wobo]

(In the past ELP had a song "Lucky man")

Most people forget that Lucky Man became worm fodder at the end of the song.
But you can always enter the Zeppelin and take the Stairway to Heaven for spiritual healing...

(...Clementine is now playing ELP's 4-Bridges-Suite)

[keksbaecker]

I am also just a simple end user and for me it is more important to have a stable and running System than having the the latest Desktop Environment installed.

Personally I think a new release every nine months would be great but I could also imagine a release every year if it is possible to install a newer (even it is not the newest) version of e.g. LibreOffice or Pidgin using the official Mageia repositories instead of downloading it from their Homepage and maybe have to compile myself (I tried once and failed)..

[dave]

Six months are too short to produce something good. Nine months would be great but i hope that big upgrade would end fine and don't be necessary do a fresh install.

[byakuya]

Hi

I'm fine with Proposal 1:

6 months release cycle -> 12 months life cycle ( Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva < 2010.1 && Mandriva != 2006.0 )

I just HOPE that Mageia 2 will not be integrating Gnome3 because its really a creepy kiddy stuff.

Thanks

[pmithrandir]

is it possible to extnd the "current" version to all pckage ?

For exemple, for the kernel, you can choose between a define version 2.6.8, or choose the latest or current package that update automaticly.

For the 40 or 50 main applications it would be a nice solution to resolve the problem.

[Garthhh]

I'm an end user
I'm here in search of a replacement for ubuntu.

some of the reasons that prompted my distro shopping are what I consider to be deficiencies of ubun
Unity
the short release cycle [yes I know there is LTS]
corporate shenanigans

I have a few distros running on a virtual box
I'm thinking I need to be on the redhat/fedora/suse/mandriva side of the street
Magiea appeals to me for a couple of reasons
no corporate overlords
a range of desktop environments

like many I'm tech support for friends & family
I play around closer to the bleeding edge than what I install for other people

I like option 3

[rat4]

Hello.
I think release cycle of 6-9 months will be good choice.
Also I'd like see good rolling branch with newest packages and without (or short) freeze time. Like in Frugalware Linux as example.

[kiki]

I am also just a simple end user and for me it is more important to have a stable and running System than having the the latest Desktop Environment installed.

Personally I think a new release every nine months would be great but I could also imagine a release every year if it is possible to install a newer (even it is not the newest) version of e.g. LibreOffice or Pidgin using the official Mageia repositories instead of downloading it from their Homepage and maybe have to compile myself (I tried once and failed)..

I am agree

[ruel24]

Ok, I'm new to this forum, but here it goes... I suggest having a completely new release once a year, followed by an updated ISO on a rolling release six months from the new release. Also, don't hold any release to the release date. Get it right, first. Under my scheme, it'll be a cross between what Mandriva and Fedora do now, and what PCLinuxOS and Arch do. As many of you see, maintaining a rolling release over a long time period has its pitfalls, yet so does having completely new releases every 6 months. All those that are using Mageia will be able to upgrade everything during the rolling release part of the cycle through the repositories, yet be required to reinstall only once a year when the completely new release hits. This solves 2 problems: Having time to allocate enough resources to new releases, and having current release up to date for users. It'll allow bugfixing along the way, as many will be squashed during the rolling release cycle with far fewer resources than having a completely new release. Then, those bugfixes will make their way into the full release, later on. Any thoughts?

[mithion]

I think it would be best to go with a 12 month release cycle along with updates to a selection of popular software that are not system critical (example: browsers, wine, gimp etc...). I'll admit that I'm a little biased towards stability over being bleeding edge. But every 6 months, my Ubuntu friends all come to me with their problems after they've just installed the new release which is frequently crippled with bugs.

Slackware seems to come out with a new release about every 9-12 months and they are pulling some pretty solid releases even with their very small dev team. This tells me that a distro as complex as Mageia would probably take at least 12 months to properly stabilize. This of course means that the base system is bit more "outdated" after a year, but 12 months is a fair compromise between keeping up with the new stuff and having a system that's quite old a la Red Hat.

I unfortunately don't have solid numbers to show why 12 months seems better to me, but I base my opinion on usability experience with other distros with various release cycles.

[Lebarhon]

Wouldn't it wiser to start with a one year release and later on, when all the stuff is ready and well suited (Forums and wikis in several languages for example) to move towards a nine months release or even less?

[andre]

I think a 9-12 months release of the core distro with non critical packages (like browsers, games, gimp, libreoffice) hitting the repos regularly, security and bug fixes should hit the repos as soon as they are ready (of course).
There also should be a repo that would allow for instalation of recently released (final) versions of packages (like firefox 5 today), with the only delay being the time for packaging.

[Mag]

Hi =)

Release Cycle:
My Vote at least 9 and a maximum of 12 months.

I also see that there are a few people who prefer first stability to the novelty and so we escape some of the distributions of Canonical, others do not like what he does as a company Canonical and Ubuntu fansboys not complain that queried changes, etc ... Although those who want to try new things always have many options like the branches of development of Mageia, the test releases, etc ...

It would be good Mageia same software (if you do not remember) notifies the availability of a new version of the entire operating system to download and / or upgrade the whole OS.
The existence of a notification system for new version of the full distribution would help people who are not awaiting the start of a new version. And the notification system can be very useful in non-fixed release cycles, ie when the launch does not produced always in the same month last year.

Bye ...

[isadora]

Very nice to see that much input in this topic, especially by newcomers.
Would like to welcome all those new to the Mageia-forum, and encourage to introduce in:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15

Thanks in advance!!!

[dave]

Tomorrow is the day. What conclusions can we draw from this topic?

[jkerr82508]

It would be good Mageia same software (if you do not remember) notifies the availability of a new version of the entire operating system to download and / or upgrade the whole OS.
The existence of a notification system for new version of the full distribution would help people who are not awaiting the start of a new version. And the notification system can be very useful in non-fixed release cycles, ie when the launch does not produced always in the same month last year.

That already exists (in the mgaonline package, which is installed by default) and was used to upgrade from mdv.

http://mageia.org/en/1/migrate/#inline

Jim

[Mag]

thanks I have been overlooked

[pmithrandir]

In my previous idea of "current version" pckage and number version package, firefox-current or firefox-3 for example.

Do you think it would be possible to choose in the update menu between both system ?
It would be a new option, and maybe we would find the same in the installation process.

After that, people would have the choice in the rpm database to choose manually if they want to have a different way to do it on a package view.

I think most users don't mind if they have the new KDE or the newest kernel. but they want firefox 5 the day it's release.

[Mag]

Perhaps in the future you can add the option of rolling release or rolling release light model to launch classic.

Rolling Distro Light: similar function, although there are releases. There is a minimum stable core and the system remains unchanged (except for bug fixes and security) over the lifetime of the release. The rest of the system itself is updated with the rolling-distro system.

Currently the only distro I've seen that everything is intended to cover OpenSuse, the Clasical Release, Factory, Evergreen and Tumbleweed:

OpenSUse Factory
OpenSUse Tumbleweed
OpenSUse Evergreen

[default_username]

Not a dev, but the idea of rolling releases, or perhaps semi-rolling releases, is pretty appealing to me. Of course, whatever works best for the devs works best for me.