12:52 p.m.
So this has popped up now:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/Schedule
I don't like this in the least: not only is this only a 5 month schedule, not
the usual 6, but the final devel freeze is 6 days before the scheduled KDE 4.0
release, which is pretty unfortunate. :-(
Kevin Kofler
12:55 p.m.
On Thursday 31 May 2007 13:52:45 Kevin Kofler wrote:
So this has popped up now:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/Schedule
I don't like this in the least: not only is this only a 5 month schedule,
not the usual 6, but the final devel freeze is 6 days before the scheduled
KDE 4.0 release, which is pretty unfortunate. :-(
While unfortunate, it is /extremely/ important for Fedora to get back on a
regular and expected schedule, that being end of October, end of April.
Doing so will allow projects like Gnome and KDE to slightly adjust to fit, as
well as provide a predictable schedule for other feature sets, with a better
idea that if we miss this one, the next one is going to happen /then/ and we
can target for that. Having a stable schedule is far more important for this
release than picking up the latest KDE.
--
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
1:02 p.m.
Jesse Keating <jkeating <at> redhat.com> writes:
can target for that. Having a stable schedule is far more important
for this
release than picking up the latest KDE.
This is not just "the latest KDE", this is a new major version which has been
under development for years and which everyone is waiting for. The current
schedule means we'll be forced to either ship a release candidate or do some
really ugly parallel-installability hacks (or skip KDE 4 for F8 altogether and
only have it 6 months late). It's hard enough to ship compatibility kdelibs,
shipping both versions of the entire desktop is worse.
As for upstream projects adapting to Fedora's schedule, why would they adapt to
Fedora's schedule rather than the one of the zillion other distros around? This
is never going to work in that direction.
And as for the regular release part, don't the schedules always slip anyway?
Kevin Kofler
1:07 p.m.
Kevin Kofler wrote:
The current
schedule means we'll be forced to either ship a release candidate
Which would be bad how? Traditionally, RC is "we think this is good
enough to release right now. We just want some additional feedback to
find last minute bugs. Only blockers will get fixed." That meshes well
with our freeze philosophy.
Also, we ship RCs of GNOME too knowing full well that it is in lockdown
mode once it hits RCs. We've done RCs of things in GA with the
expectation that we'll pick up the final as an update post-release.
1:07 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 18:02 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
And as for the regular release part, don't the schedules always
slip anyway?
Pretty much always, and it goes both ways. F8 could push back a week or
two to try to accomodate KDE, but then KDE may wind up pushing back a
bit to finish up some last bits. Then F8 has to either go ahead and
release sans KDE final, or wait more, and then the Gnome-ers are
screaming "why are we waiting for KDE? I don't use it so that must mean
that no one does!" etc etc.
It sucks, but that's life.
--
David Hollis <dhollis(a)davehollis.com>
1:10 p.m.
David Hollis <dhollis <at> davehollis.com> writes:
bit to finish up some last bits. Then F8 has to either go ahead and
release sans KDE final, or wait more, and then the Gnome-ers are
screaming "why are we waiting for KDE? I don't use it so that must mean
that no one does!" etc etc.
But the current state is that the release is being anticipated a month to fit
GNOME at the expense of KDE. :-/
Kevin Kofler
1:14 p.m.
On 5/31/07, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at> wrote:
David Hollis <dhollis <at> davehollis.com> writes:
> bit to finish up some last bits. Then F8 has to either go ahead and
> release sans KDE final, or wait more, and then the Gnome-ers are
> screaming "why are we waiting for KDE? I don't use it so that must mean
> that no one does!" etc etc.
But the current state is that the release is being anticipated a month to fit
GNOME at the expense of KDE. :-/
Kevin Kofler
I've "heard" this, but haven't seen any evidence to support this, have
you?
--
Fedora Core 6 and proud
2:03 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 14:14 -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On 5/31/07, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at> wrote:
> David Hollis <dhollis <at> davehollis.com> writes:
> > bit to finish up some last bits. Then F8 has to either go ahead and
> > release sans KDE final, or wait more, and then the Gnome-ers are
> > screaming "why are we waiting for KDE? I don't use it so that must
mean
> > that no one does!" etc etc.
>
> But the current state is that the release is being anticipated a month to fit
> GNOME at the expense of KDE. :-/
>
> Kevin Kofler
I've "heard" this, but haven't seen any evidence to support this, have
you?
Actually it is to get us back on a schedule where we don't lose a good
portion of the development staff for a month b/c of the winter holidays.
-sv
1:35 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 18:10 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
David Hollis <dhollis <at> davehollis.com> writes:
> bit to finish up some last bits. Then F8 has to either go ahead and
> release sans KDE final, or wait more, and then the Gnome-ers are
> screaming "why are we waiting for KDE? I don't use it so that must mean
> that no one does!" etc etc.
But the current state is that the release is being anticipated a month to fit
GNOME at the expense of KDE. :-/
Well, the primary default desktop for Fedora is based on GNOME.
Regardless, we should be able to use a RC for KDE as we have with GNOME
in the past.
/B
--
Brian Pepple <bpepple(a)fedoraproject.org>
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E
BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
1:36 p.m.
Kevin Kofler wrote:
David Hollis <dhollis <at> davehollis.com> writes:
> bit to finish up some last bits. Then F8 has to either go ahead and
> release sans KDE final, or wait more, and then the Gnome-ers are
> screaming "why are we waiting for KDE? I don't use it so that must mean
> that no one does!" etc etc.
But the current state is that the release is being anticipated a month to fit
GNOME at the expense of KDE. :-/
You got to pick one. right?
Rahul
1:39 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
October the 31st., maybe we can codename it the "Halloween Release" as a
tribute...
Rahul Sundaram escribió:
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> David Hollis <dhollis <at> davehollis.com> writes:
>> bit to finish up some last bits. Then F8 has to either go ahead and
>> release sans KDE final, or wait more, and then the Gnome-ers are
>> screaming "why are we waiting for KDE? I don't use it so that must
mean
>> that no one does!" etc etc.
>
> But the current state is that the release is being anticipated a month
> to fit GNOME at the expense of KDE. :-/
You got to pick one. right?
Rahul
- --
- - --
Nicolas A. Corrarello
Fedora Ambassador Argentina c: +54 (911) 5182-2245
e: ncorrare(a)fedoraproject.org
GPG Key: DFC893EE h:
fedoraproject.org/wiki/NicolasCorrarello/
GPG Fingerprint: 5C93 42DA 98E1 4EEF B24B 7F8C E145 B2F9 DFC8 93EE
Import my key: $ gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-key 0xDFC893EE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGXxZF4UWy+d/Ik+4RAiiiAKC1tkHhRq+5umJudsancFbTlVr8OACeJI+2
SPh6HlArqiX3MbYNyNNmwlM=
=EWRi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
2:05 p.m.
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thursday 31 May 2007 14:41:46 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> October the 31st., maybe we can codename it the "Halloween Release" as
a
>> tribute...
> Maybe not. It doesn't fit into a global culture.
There is Red Hat company history there Rahul.
More aptly Red Hat Linux History:
[1] "Then in 1994 Marc Ewing created his own version of Linux, which he
named Red Hat Linux. Ewing released it in October, and it became known
as the Halloween release."
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat
--
Pete Graner email: <pgraner(a)redhat.com>
Senior Engineering Manager Office: 978.392.2476
Base Operating Systems Mobile: 978.987.3125
Red Hat Inc. http://www.redhat.com
7:17 a.m.
* Ralf Ertzinger [01/06/2007 14:06] :
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 00:34:21 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> Then again, neither does Fedora 7's name.
There was a full moon yesterday.
Not the first explanation that sprang to my mind while reading the release
announcement, to be honest.
Emmanuel
7:46 a.m.
Emmanuel Seyman <emmanuel.seyman(a)club-internet.fr> writes:
* Ralf Ertzinger [01/06/2007 14:06] :
>
> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 00:34:21 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>
> > Then again, neither does Fedora 7's name.
>
> There was a full moon yesterday.
Not the first explanation that sprang to my mind while reading the release
announcement, to be honest.
Could someone enlighten a stupid German?
--
Did you ever realize how much text fits in eighty columns? If you now consider
that a signature usually consists of up to four lines, this gives you enough
space to spread a tremendous amount of information with your messages. So seize
this opportunity and don't waste your signature with bullshit nobody will read.
7:53 a.m.
On 6/1/07, Frank Schmitt <ich(a)frank-schmitt.net> wrote:
Emmanuel Seyman <emmanuel.seyman(a)club-internet.fr> writes:
> * Ralf Ertzinger [01/06/2007 14:06] :
>>
>> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 00:34:21 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>>
>> > Then again, neither does Fedora 7's name.
>>
>> There was a full moon yesterday.
>
> Not the first explanation that sprang to my mind while reading the release
> announcement, to be honest.
Could someone enlighten a stupid German?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonshine
--
Fedora Core 6 and proud
1:54 p.m.
On Friday 2007-06-01 15:53:58 Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On 6/1/07, Frank Schmitt <ich(a)frank-schmitt.net> wrote:
> Emmanuel Seyman <emmanuel.seyman(a)club-internet.fr> writes:
>
> > * Ralf Ertzinger [01/06/2007 14:06] :
> >>
> >> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 00:34:21 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> >>
> >> > Then again, neither does Fedora 7's name.
> >>
> >> There was a full moon yesterday.
> >
> > Not the first explanation that sprang to my mind while reading the release
> > announcement, to be honest.
>
> Could someone enlighten a stupid German?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonshine
Ha-ha, in this case can we translate it as 'Ракия' (Rakia) in the release notes
for our Bulgarian users? :-D (sorry, couldn't stop myself)
--
Regards,
Doncho N. Gunchev, GPG key ID: 0EF40B9E, Key server: pgp.mit.edu
4:51 p.m.
Ha-ha, in this case can we translate it as 'Ракия' (Rakia) in
the release notes
for our Bulgarian users? :-D (sorry, couldn't stop myself)
LOL :)
Then it is very, very similar for Croatian users: "Rakija" :)))
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241
Skype: valent.turkovic
7:54 a.m.
Frank Schmitt wrote:
Emmanuel Seyman <emmanuel.seyman(a)club-internet.fr> writes:
> * Ralf Ertzinger [01/06/2007 14:06] :
>> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 00:34:21 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>>
>>> Then again, neither does Fedora 7's name.
>> There was a full moon yesterday.
> Not the first explanation that sprang to my mind while reading the release
> announcement, to be honest.
Could someone enlighten a stupid German?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonshine
Rahul
10:32 a.m.
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 14:46:58 +0200,
Frank Schmitt <ich(a)frank-schmitt.net> wrote:
Emmanuel Seyman <emmanuel.seyman(a)club-internet.fr> writes:
> * Ralf Ertzinger [01/06/2007 14:06] :
>>
>> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 00:34:21 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>>
>> > Then again, neither does Fedora 7's name.
>>
>> There was a full moon yesterday.
>
> Not the first explanation that sprang to my mind while reading the release
> announcement, to be honest.
Could someone enlighten a stupid German?
Moonshine is distilled alcohol made without an OK from the government.
1:28 p.m.
On 6/1/07, Bruno Wolff III <bruno(a)wolff.to> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 14:46:58 +0200,
Frank Schmitt <ich(a)frank-schmitt.net> wrote:
> Emmanuel Seyman <emmanuel.seyman(a)club-internet.fr> writes:
>
> > * Ralf Ertzinger [01/06/2007 14:06] :
> >>
> >> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 00:34:21 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> >>
> >> > Then again, neither does Fedora 7's name.
> >>
> >> There was a full moon yesterday.
> >
> > Not the first explanation that sprang to my mind while reading the release
> > announcement, to be honest.
>
> Could someone enlighten a stupid German?
Moonshine is distilled alcohol made without an OK from the government.
Think of moonshine as marijuana and "legal alcohol" as tobacco.
--
Fedora Core 6 and proud
1:11 p.m.
On 5/31/07, David Hollis <dhollis(a)davehollis.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 18:02 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> And as for the regular release part, don't the schedules always slip anyway?
>
Pretty much always, and it goes both ways. F8 could push back a week or
two to try to accomodate KDE, but then KDE may wind up pushing back a
bit to finish up some last bits. Then F8 has to either go ahead and
release sans KDE final, or wait more, and then the Gnome-ers are
screaming "why are we waiting for KDE? I don't use it so that must mean
that no one does!" etc etc.
It sucks, but that's life.
In such a case, i suggest shipping KDE 3.x and go to KDE 4.x mid F8.
Anything less will cause the usual sentiments that Fedora doesn't care
about KDE.
--
Fedora Core 6 and proud
1:17 p.m.
Arthur Pemberton <pemboa <at> gmail.com> writes:
In such a case, i suggest shipping KDE 3.x and go to KDE 4.x mid F8.
There's no way we can go from 3.5.x to 4.0.x in the middle of a release, that
would cause big fallout.
What we _can_ do, and what I'll suggest doing in the KDE SIG meeting, is ship
whatever release candidate or whatever is current (maybe even the final release
if it's prereleased to packagers early enough) and then update that to the
final if needed.
Still, it would have been easier if Fedora just stayed at its usual 6 months
per release.
Kevin Kofler
1:19 p.m.
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On 5/31/07, David Hollis <dhollis(a)davehollis.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 18:02 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> > And as for the regular release part, don't the schedules always slip
> > anyway?
> >
>
> Pretty much always, and it goes both ways. F8 could push back a week or
> two to try to accomodate KDE, but then KDE may wind up pushing back a
> bit to finish up some last bits. Then F8 has to either go ahead and
> release sans KDE final, or wait more, and then the Gnome-ers are
> screaming "why are we waiting for KDE? I don't use it so that must mean
> that no one does!" etc etc.
>
> It sucks, but that's life.
In such a case, i suggest shipping KDE 3.x and go to KDE 4.x mid F8.
Not an option, that path leads to madness, unless kde3/kde4 suddenly become
100% parallel-installable between now and then (possible, but highly
unlikely).
-- rex
1:14 p.m.
On Thursday 31 May 2007 14:02:42 Kevin Kofler wrote:
This is not just "the latest KDE", this is a new major
version which has
been under development for years and which everyone is waiting for. The
current schedule means we'll be forced to either ship a release candidate
or do some really ugly parallel-installability hacks (or skip KDE 4 for F8
altogether and only have it 6 months late). It's hard enough to ship
compatibility kdelibs, shipping both versions of the entire desktop is
worse.
We've done RCs in the past if the project is in full bugfix mode, updating to
the final releases shortly after a Fedora release.
As for upstream projects adapting to Fedora's schedule, why would they
adapt to Fedora's schedule rather than the one of the zillion other distros
around? This is never going to work in that direction.
It's happened in the past. Gnome's schedule used to be tightly tied to the
Red Hat Linux release schedule. With Fedora we've drifted around so much
that it's hard to pin to a Fedora release. However if we get more stable
with our release cycle again it will make it easier for upstreams to take
into account a Fedora release as part of their release schedules.
And as for the regular release part, don't the schedules always
slip
anyway?
Schedules slipped in the past largely for getting features in or fixing half
baked features that were rushed in, largely due to uncertainty as to when the
next release will be out. With a stable schedule we can be much more firm
about dropping features and punting them to next release, minimizing the
effect of half baked stuff on our schedule.
Slips happen yes, but we're also going to be careful to not allow a slip in
one release to effect the schedule of the next release, again keeping things
predictable.
--
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
1:26 p.m.
On 5/31/07, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at> wrote:
This is not just "the latest KDE", this is a new major
version which has been
under development for years and which everyone is waiting for.
I'm not waiting for it. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think in the
past pieces of the gnome stack have shipped in release candidate form
in fedora due to scheduling. If after years of development, patched
release candidates within two weeks of the official kde release are
going to be problematic to release, I'm not sure the official release
a few days later would be that much better. But hey, maybe all the
really good development work gets done right near the end of the
deadline for KDE, in which case you'd be right to be concerned and at
the same time fedora leadership's desire to implement hard deadline
would gain additional empirical support.
And as for the regular release part, don't the schedules always
slip anyway?
The cynic in me says... yes, but you can't plan for that. The firmer
the deadlines that more easily progress can be tracked and testing can
be structured and volunteer time can be planned. Raise your hand if
you attempt to schedule your personal afk time like vacations and
other real-life crap with some idea of the Fedora schedule in mind to
avoid going afk just before a scheduled release. Deadline slips cause
real problems in terms of resource planning. A hard, solid deadline is
really extremely important for people to plan for.
Bitch and moan about the specific deadline as much as you want, but
whatever the deadline ends up being we need to start seeing it firm up
if we can.
-jef"we will never ever be able to schedule in a way that works with
all project release scheduling. As long as individual projects
construct their own scheduling plans compromises will result"spaleta
1:44 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 13:55 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
While unfortunate, it is /extremely/ important for Fedora to get
back
on a regular and expected schedule,
That much I'll accept, although I'm not entirely convinced of _how_
important it is...
that being end of October, end of April.
... but what's so special about October and April that we have to have a
strict 6-month release cycle from now on _except_ for the 5-month cycle
for F8?
--
dwmw2
1:56 p.m.
David Woodhouse <dwmw2 <at> infradead.org> writes:
> that being end of October, end of April.
... but what's so special about October and April that we have to have a
strict 6-month release cycle from now on _except_ for the 5-month cycle
for F8?
+1
However, I think I already know the answer...
Kevin Kofler
1:59 p.m.
On Thursday 31 May 2007 14:44:45 David Woodhouse wrote:
... but what's so special about October and April that we have to
have a
strict 6-month release cycle from now on _except_ for the 5-month cycle
for F8?
End of October gives us some window of slippage before running into massive
holiday outages.
End of April is not the end of the quarter which helps for getting attention,
resources, availability, etc... And end of April was the target for Fedora
7, we're sticking to our guns here with 'a slip of one release will not
effect the schedule of the next release' by sticking with 6 months beyond the
first Fedora 7 target release date.
--
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
2:30 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 14:59 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thursday 31 May 2007 14:44:45 David Woodhouse wrote:
> ... but what's so special about October and April that we have to have a
> strict 6-month release cycle from now on _except_ for the 5-month cycle
> for F8?
End of October gives us some window of slippage before running into massive
holiday outages.
Makes sense.
--
dwmw2
1:09 p.m.
Kevin Kofler wrote:
So this has popped up now:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/Schedule
I don't like this in the least: not only is this only a 5 month schedule,
not the usual 6, but the final devel freeze is 6 days before the scheduled
KDE 4.0 release, which is pretty unfortunate. :-(
KDE usually releases source to packagers for 1-2 weeks prior to official
release anyway, so (crosses fingers), it shouldn't be much of an issue.
-- Rex
1:35 p.m.
tor, 31 05 2007 kl. 17:52 +0000, skrev Kevin Kofler:
So this has popped up now:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/Schedule
I'd love to see GNOME releases always making the test3 release so we can
hammer at it, this means the test3 devel freeze must be on the 19th of
September or later, currently that date is set on the 17th. Seeing as
the KDE team also has a desire for a bit more time and that the goal was
to align Fedora with upstream release cycles there is a certain amount
of sense in adjusting the dates a bit.
This would allow time for doing QA and if we launch a test candidate
with the final GNOME that is a good tool to attract new testers for the
final rush.
In this cycle we should also not be to stubborn to forget that KDE 4.0
is a major release and that it's wildly anticipated. It would look good
on Fedora record if we were to make the effort to get it into F8 in a
final form. This would allow for both new users to jump to Fedora to try
KDE4 and it would aid in getting the stigma that we mistreat KDE removed
from our reputation.
- David Nielsen
1:40 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 17:52 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
So this has popped up now:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/Schedule
A couple of things... first being that this is just a draft/preliminary
version.
I don't like this in the least: not only is this only a 5 month
schedule, not
the usual 6,
So, the five instead of six does have its downsides, but the idea is
that we want to get back to where we were being better with hitting our
release date targets. For a variety of reasons, we've gotten really bad
about that. So it's time to get back on the horse so to speak. The
obvious question then is "well, then why not do six months this time".
And the reason is the end of year holidays. 6 months would basically be
December 1st. And then, if you have _any_ slippage at all, you're
slipping a lot. Because you hit all of those December holidays and then
are into the middle of January before people are actually working
again ;) So, if we shoot for Halloween, there's a little bit of cushion
for the case of a need to slip without a horrible domino effect.
The other part here is that the idea is that we keep to the consistent
schedule if a release slips. F7 was _supposed_ to be out the end of
April; we slipped for the merge. But given what we're trying for, that
(in the future) wouldn't have any impact on the n+1 schedule. This just
gives us an opportunity to get a running start with that being the
method to our madness.
Jeremy
2:01 p.m.
Before I say anything, I'm going to declare an interest: I use KDE and
hate GNOME.
To me, it is more counterproductive to ship without KDE 4 and on a
strict schedule than to ship with it on a lose one. Fedora has a (well
deserved) reputation for being cutting edge, but nor bleeding edge - not
shipping with KDE 4 would be a serious blow to this, this being the main
reason I used Fedora in the first place.
Kevin Kofler wrote:
So this has popped up now:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/Schedule
I don't like this in the least: not only is this only a 5 month schedule, not
the usual 6, but the final devel freeze is 6 days before the scheduled KDE 4.0
release, which is pretty unfortunate. :-(
Kevin Kofler
--
Benjamin Lewis
Fedora Ambassador
ben.lewis(a)benl.co.uk
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://benl.co.uk./ PGP Key: 0x647E480C
"In cases of major discrepancy, it is always reality that got it wrong"
-- RFC 1118
8:22 a.m.
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 17:52 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
So this has popped up now:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/Schedule
I don't like this in the least: not only is this only a 5 month schedule, not
the usual 6, but the final devel freeze is 6 days before the scheduled KDE 4.0
release, which is pretty unfortunate. :-(
Some more notes about this draft: it puts feature freeze in bold letters
at August 20, which is only a few days after gnome 2.20 beta1, and is
the exact same date as the Google SoC deadline. Since we are hoping to
integrate SoC results for some features (Bluetooth support comes to
mind), I hope that there will be enough flexibility to make this
possible.
8:35 a.m.
On Friday 01 June 2007 09:22:21 Matthias Clasen wrote:
Some more notes about this draft: it puts feature freeze in bold
letters
at August 20, which is only a few days after gnome 2.20 beta1, and is
the exact same date as the Google SoC deadline. Since we are hoping to
integrate SoC results for some features (Bluetooth support comes to
mind), I hope that there will be enough flexibility to make this
possible.
Surely there will be some GSoC RC releases prior to the deadline, with
features mostly done and in bugfix mode right?
--
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
8:35 a.m.
On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 09:35 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Friday 01 June 2007 09:22:21 Matthias Clasen wrote:
> Some more notes about this draft: it puts feature freeze in bold letters
> at August 20, which is only a few days after gnome 2.20 beta1, and is
> the exact same date as the Google SoC deadline. Since we are hoping to
> integrate SoC results for some features (Bluetooth support comes to
> mind), I hope that there will be enough flexibility to make this
> possible.
Surely there will be some GSoC RC releases prior to the deadline, with
features mostly done and in bugfix mode right?
Thats what should be hoped for, certainly, but you never know...I just
wanted to point out the tight deadline alignment there.
8:48 a.m.
On Friday 01 June 2007 09:35:31 Matthias Clasen wrote:
Thats what should be hoped for, certainly, but you never know...I
just
wanted to point out the tight deadline alignment there.
Noted. Do you have wiki edit rights to add this to the Fedora 8 schedule page?
It's good to have all such considerations tracked in the wiki.
--
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
9:13 a.m.
Matthias Clasen <mclasen <at> redhat.com> writes:
Some more notes about this draft: it puts feature freeze in bold
letters
at August 20, which is only a few days after gnome 2.20 beta1, and is
It's good to know that some folks from the GNOME camp are also not happy with
that schedule (see also David Nielsen's message about the test3 freeze date).
One one hand, it makes me feel better because this means the schedule isn't
favoring GNOME over KDE, on the other hand it makes the schedule look even
worse, because this means it's misaligned with both the GNOME and KDE
schedules, at least one of which is central to every desktop user's experience
of Fedora.
Kevin Kofler
9:16 a.m.
I wrote:
worse, because this means it's misaligned with both the GNOME and
KDE
schedules, at least one of which is central to every desktop user's
experience of Fedora.
Whoops, let's make this "most desktop users' experience", lest we anger
the
XFCE and lightweight WM users. Sorry for that. ;-)
Kevin Kofler
11:37 p.m.
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 14:16:17 +0000 (UTC)
kevin.kofler(a)chello.at (Kevin Kofler) wrote:
I wrote:
> worse, because this means it's misaligned with both the GNOME and
> KDE schedules, at least one of which is central to every desktop
> user's experience of Fedora.
Whoops, let's make this "most desktop users' experience", lest we
anger the XFCE and lightweight WM users. Sorry for that. ;-)
:)
Just as a data point Xfce is not on a time based release cycle. The next
version will be ready when its ready.
Kevin Kofler
kevin
3:58 p.m.
fre, 01 06 2007 kl. 14:13 +0000, skrev Kevin Kofler:
Matthias Clasen <mclasen <at> redhat.com> writes:
> Some more notes about this draft: it puts feature freeze in bold letters
> at August 20, which is only a few days after gnome 2.20 beta1, and is
It's good to know that some folks from the GNOME camp are also not happy with
that schedule (see also David Nielsen's message about the test3 freeze date).
One one hand, it makes me feel better because this means the schedule isn't
favoring GNOME over KDE, on the other hand it makes the schedule look even
worse, because this means it's misaligned with both the GNOME and KDE
schedules, at least one of which is central to every desktop user's experience
of Fedora.
To be honest normally I wouldn't have a problem favoring GNOME over KDE,
it has always been the default desktop but in this case I think it would
be entirely foolish to forget just how major a release KDE 4.0 is. We
have users waiting for it like crack addicts and it would look better if
we were able to ship with the final release.
Having the final version looks better to users not to mention it will do
wonders for PR to both have KDE4 as one of the first stable distro
releases and to show that we really do care about KDE in defiance of
popular belief.
I hear KDE 4.1 is aimed at being a 6 month release, this would then mean
we align nicely for a F9 with KDE4 and GNOME 2.22. That would accomplice
the goal of adjusting the schedule which was aimed for rather nicely..
provided neither projects slips their release date.
For KDE4 to hit on the final devel freeze we are merely talking putting
back the schedule by about a week which if we push Test3 devel freeze to
the the 25th of September that would allow us to ship Test3 with KDE
4.0-rc1 and GNOME 2.20 - I'm hoping that will provide helpful for
getting testers to start using the release and we can accommodate both
major releases in the final release.
Cut dates would then be:
September 19th - GNOME 2.20
September 25th - KDE 4.0-rc1
September 25th - Test3 devel freeze
October 1st - Test3 release
October 23th - KDE 4.0 final
October 23th - Final devel freeze.
November 7th - Final release
- Is this insanity?
- If I'm to understand Rex KDE packagers get the tarballs in time to
make this?
- can we live with doing freezes on a Tuesday instead of a Monday?
And we'd be roughly on schedule with GNOME and KDE for F9 following that
considering a standard 6 month cycle.
- David Nielsen
4:08 p.m.
On 6/1/07, David Nielsen <david(a)lovesunix.net> wrote:
fre, 01 06 2007 kl. 14:13 +0000, skrev Kevin Kofler:
> Matthias Clasen <mclasen <at> redhat.com> writes:
> > Some more notes about this draft: it puts feature freeze in bold
letters
> > at August 20, which is only a few days after gnome 2.20 beta1, and is
>
> It's good to know that some folks from the GNOME camp are also not happy
with
> that schedule (see also David Nielsen's message about the test3 freeze
date).
> One one hand, it makes me feel better because this means the schedule
isn't
> favoring GNOME over KDE, on the other hand it makes the schedule look
even
> worse, because this means it's misaligned with both the GNOME and KDE
> schedules, at least one of which is central to every desktop user's
experience
> of Fedora.
To be honest normally I wouldn't have a problem favoring GNOME over KDE,
it has always been the default desktop but in this case I think it would
be entirely foolish to forget just how major a release KDE 4.0 is. We
have users waiting for it like crack addicts and it would look better if
we were able to ship with the final release.
Having the final version looks better to users not to mention it will do
wonders for PR to both have KDE4 as one of the first stable distro
releases and to show that we really do care about KDE in defiance of
popular belief.
I hear KDE 4.1 is aimed at being a 6 month release, this would then mean
we align nicely for a F9 with KDE4 and GNOME 2.22. That would accomplice
the goal of adjusting the schedule which was aimed for rather nicely..
provided neither projects slips their release date.
For KDE4 to hit on the final devel freeze we are merely talking putting
back the schedule by about a week which if we push Test3 devel freeze to
the the 25th of September that would allow us to ship Test3 with KDE
4.0-rc1 and GNOME 2.20 - I'm hoping that will provide helpful for
getting testers to start using the release and we can accommodate both
major releases in the final release.
Cut dates would then be:
September 19th - GNOME 2.20
September 25th - KDE 4.0-rc1
September 25th - Test3 devel freeze
October 1st - Test3 release
October 23th - KDE 4.0 final
October 23th - Final devel freeze.
November 7th - Final release
- Is this insanity?
- If I'm to understand Rex KDE packagers get the tarballs in time to
make this?
- can we live with doing freezes on a Tuesday instead of a Monday?
And we'd be roughly on schedule with GNOME and KDE for F9 following that
considering a standard 6 month cycle.
+1
4:46 p.m.
dragoran wrote:
On 6/1/07, *David Nielsen* <david(a)lovesunix.net
<mailto:david@lovesunix.net>> wrote:
fre, 01 06 2007 kl. 14:13 +0000, skrev Kevin Kofler:
> Matthias Clasen <mclasen <at> redhat.com <http://redhat.com>>
writes:
> > Some more notes about this draft: it puts feature freeze in
bold letters
> > at August 20, which is only a few days after gnome 2.20 beta1,
and is
>
> It's good to know that some folks from the GNOME camp are also
not happy with
> that schedule (see also David Nielsen's message about the test3
freeze date).
> One one hand, it makes me feel better because this means the
schedule isn't
> favoring GNOME over KDE, on the other hand it makes the schedule
look even
> worse, because this means it's misaligned with both the GNOME
and KDE
> schedules, at least one of which is central to every desktop
user's experience
> of Fedora.
To be honest normally I wouldn't have a problem favoring GNOME
over KDE,
it has always been the default desktop but in this case I think it
would
be entirely foolish to forget just how major a release KDE 4.0 is. We
have users waiting for it like crack addicts and it would look
better if
we were able to ship with the final release.
Having the final version looks better to users not to mention it
will do
wonders for PR to both have KDE4 as one of the first stable distro
releases and to show that we really do care about KDE in defiance of
popular belief.
I hear KDE 4.1 is aimed at being a 6 month release, this would
then mean
we align nicely for a F9 with KDE4 and GNOME 2.22. That would
accomplice
the goal of adjusting the schedule which was aimed for rather nicely..
provided neither projects slips their release date.
For KDE4 to hit on the final devel freeze we are merely talking
putting
back the schedule by about a week which if we push Test3 devel
freeze to
the the 25th of September that would allow us to ship Test3 with KDE
4.0-rc1 and GNOME 2.20 - I'm hoping that will provide helpful for
getting testers to start using the release and we can accommodate both
major releases in the final release.
Cut dates would then be:
September 19th - GNOME 2.20
September 25th - KDE 4.0-rc1
September 25th - Test3 devel freeze
October 1st - Test3 release
October 23th - KDE 4.0 final
October 23th - Final devel freeze.
November 7th - Final release
- Is this insanity?
- If I'm to understand Rex KDE packagers get the tarballs in time to
make this?
- can we live with doing freezes on a Tuesday instead of a Monday?
And we'd be roughly on schedule with GNOME and KDE for F9
following that
considering a standard 6 month cycle.
+1
+1
--
Benjamin Lewis
Fedora Ambassador
ben.lewis(a)benl.co.uk
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://benl.co.uk./ PGP Key: 0x647E480C
"In cases of major discrepancy, it is always reality that got it wrong"
-- RFC 1118
1:29 a.m.
On 01.06.2007 23:46, Benjamin Lewis wrote:
dragoran wrote:
> On 6/1/07, *David Nielsen* <david(a)lovesunix.net
> <mailto:david@lovesunix.net>> wrote:
> [...]
> For KDE4 to hit on the final devel freeze we are merely talking
> putting
> back the schedule by about a week which if we push Test3 devel
> freeze to
> the the 25th of September that would allow us to ship Test3 with KDE
> 4.0-rc1 and GNOME 2.20 - I'm hoping that will provide helpful for
> getting testers to start using the release and we can accommodate both
> major releases in the final release.
>
> Cut dates would then be:
> September 19th - GNOME 2.20
> September 25th - KDE 4.0-rc1
> September 25th - Test3 devel freeze
> October 1st - Test3 release
> October 23th - KDE 4.0 final
> October 23th - Final devel freeze.
> November 7th - Final release
>
> - Is this insanity?
> - If I'm to understand Rex KDE packagers get the tarballs in time to
> make this?
> - can we live with doing freezes on a Tuesday instead of a Monday?
>
> And we'd be roughly on schedule with GNOME and KDE for F9
> following that
> considering a standard 6 month cycle.
> +1
+1
/me votes for the Fedora-Schedule as it is in the wiki and adjust that
in August / early September to the KDE 4.0 Schedule if it looks like KDE
4.0 will ship as scheduled.
KDE 4.0 is a big rework afaics. Especially those in my experiences from
the open source software world tend to slip quite often for weeks or
even months. That would be a major problem for Fedora then.
Or are you guys that voted for "+1" really 100% sure KDE 4.0 will be on
time? What is your backup plan if KDE 4.0 slips for one or two months?
CU
knurd
6:33 p.m.
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:58:07PM +0200, David Nielsen wrote:
I hear KDE 4.1 is aimed at being a 6 month release, this would then
mean
we align nicely for a F9 with KDE4 and GNOME 2.22. That would accomplice
the goal of adjusting the schedule which was aimed for rather nicely..
provided neither projects slips their release date.
Why does the KDE spin have to
be released at the same time as the general
GNOME-oriented release?
With F7 creating custom spins should be "easy". Just have a time when the
GNOME desktop will be ready (and well-tested) as the F8 release, release
a F8 KDE spin beta/release candidate at the same time, wait for KDE final to
be out and release a F8+updates+KDE4 spin after some time of testing.
It will much likely be of much better quality than the "real" F8
by then, since the entire distro will have a month or so of testing by
those idiots that happen to believe GNOME is the better desktop.
--
Pekka Pietikainen (a GNOME user)
7:07 p.m.
On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 02:33 +0300, Pekka Pietikainen wrote:
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:58:07PM +0200, David Nielsen wrote:
> I hear KDE 4.1 is aimed at being a 6 month release, this would then mean
> we align nicely for a F9 with KDE4 and GNOME 2.22. That would accomplice
> the goal of adjusting the schedule which was aimed for rather nicely..
> provided neither projects slips their release date.
Why does the KDE spin have to be released at the same time as the general
GNOME-oriented release?
The reason is that the distro as a whole has a release at that time, not
just The GNOME spin or KDE spin, Server Spin, or etc. So if we ship
KDE3 as part of the distro wide release we probably don't want to ship
KDE4 as an update... at least, not without having kde3 compatibility
packages which Rex and Kevin think will be a fair amount of work.
Could we decide that our next release will revolve around spins instead
of a distro-wide freeze? Yes, but I don't think it's a realistic goal
for five months from now. We'd probably want to change the way we do
branching of cvs for releases and tagging of packages so that each spin
could have a different release tree if the need to make changes arose.
But we'd still need to have changes pushed back to a "mainline" so we
didn't have twenty different forks of Fedora, just temporary deviations
for when a spin was freezing for release. We'd also have to figure out
how to make sane bugzilla components for these things, decide how to
manage EOL issues for different spins, come up with a way for updates to
target different spins, etc. All in all, it would be a huge set of
changes to the way we build Fedora and we should carefully weigh the
benefits before deciding we want to do the work to make it a reality.
-Toshio
3:04 a.m.
Le vendredi 01 juin 2007 à 17:07 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 02:33 +0300, Pekka Pietikainen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:58:07PM +0200, David Nielsen wrote:
> > I hear KDE 4.1 is aimed at being a 6 month release, this would then mean
> > we align nicely for a F9 with KDE4 and GNOME 2.22. That would accomplice
> > the goal of adjusting the schedule which was aimed for rather nicely..
> > provided neither projects slips their release date.
> Why does the KDE spin have to be released at the same time as the general
> GNOME-oriented release?
The reason is that the distro as a whole has a release at that time, not
just The GNOME spin or KDE spin, Server Spin, or etc.
Also there's no way packagers would accept to freeze fedora-devel twice
at a month interval to accommodate a spin on a different schedule. So
you'd have the choice of starting from a month-old devel fork (which is
1/6th of a typical release cycle, and getting stale) or try to
restabilize devel alone (devel breaks very fast after a release because
everyone is fed up with waiting and pushes his pet unstable feature as
soon as it's unfrozen)
--
Nicolas Mailhot
6171
days inactive
6175
days old
50 comments
29 participants
participants (29)
-
Arthur Pemberton -
Benjamin Lewis -
Brian Pepple -
Bruno Wolff III -
Christopher Aillon -
David Hollis -
David Nielsen -
David Woodhouse -
Doncho N. Gunchev -
drago01 -
Emmanuel Seyman -
Frank Schmitt -
Jef Spaleta -
Jeremy Katz -
Jesse Keating -
Kevin Fenzi -
Kevin Kofler -
Matthias Clasen -
Nicolas A. Corrarello -
Nicolas Mailhot -
Pekka Pietikäinen -
Pete Graner -
Rahul Sundaram -
Ralf Ertzinger -
Rex Dieter -
seth vidal -
Thorsten Leemhuis -
Toshio Kuratomi -
Valent Turkovic