Fedora Release Engineering Meeting Recap - 2009-05-04
poelstra at redhat.com
Wed May 6 12:45:34 UTC 2009
Bill Nottingham said the following on 05/04/2009 01:01 PM Pacific Time:
> == Preview Release ==
> Known issues:
> * PPC had a variety of issues
> o oversized
> o installed the wrong kernel
> o failed to install a bootloader
> * assorted anaconda partitioning issues
> Discussed maybe using a separate config for PPC to keep it under size
> constraints, but it was decided to stay with one config.
> == Deltarpm for F11 ==
> Work needs done to either compose updates in a chroot (which has the F11
> deltarpm support) or to backport it to the OS release used to generate
> updates. Seth Vidal is going to investigate which of these makes more sense.
> Given the timeframe, this is tight for F11 final. rawhide will continue to
> have deltas, as that's a separate compose process.
> == F12 schedule ==
> The schedule proposed by John Poelstra for Fedora 12 in
> https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1271 was reviewed. The following
> changes were approved:
> * the alpha milestone was removed entirely
Reading the IRC log am I correct in understanding that a more detailed
"Remove all alpha release tasks from the schedule.
There will be no alpha release because it does not
provide enough value for the effort required to create
it. There is little public testing value from it
1) What dates are we proposing for releasing "development snapshots"
before the beta? We should put these on the schedule now.
2) The alpha release has always been a good first opportunity to start
marketing our next release, sending out press releases, etc. Basically,
drawing attention to the fact with the general public that a new
release is in the works. Without an Alpha the first general press
releases would be a month later. Is this okay?
The Alpha also naturally gets the release notes process and other parts
of Fedora going (not development focused tasks) early which is a good
thing. We'd be losing that too.
3) If we do away with Alpha as we know it, leaving two test releases,
can we simply call them "Alpha" and "Beta"? I've always thought "Preview
Release" was a funny name for a test release and I think the terms
"Alpha" and "Beta" are more familiar to the general public.
> * due to conferences such as the Red Hat Summit, LinuxCon, and Linux
> Plumber's Conference, each milestone from 'Final freeze: development'
> (2009-09-15) should be shifted out one week.
> This pushes GA from 2009-10-27 to 2009-11-03. The schedule will be presented
> for FESCo discussion at the 2009-05-08 meeting.
> For more information on any of these, see the full transcript at:
More information about the marketing