Olá Jonathan e a todos.
On Saturday 05 July 2008 22:19:21 Jonathan Jesse wrote:
Just a quick comment on the windows side of the things. In Vista there is
no longer a run command, it is search and works great. One of the things
I use every day on my work (Vista) machine that I miss in the
Am Montag, den 07.07.2008, 09:33 +0100 schrieb Matt Zimmerman:
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 03:27:46PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Do we need to reconsider how we approach getting to a release? For an LTS
release should we just add 2 months on the schedule? It was done
officially for Dapper
Am 07.07.2008 um 11:06 schrieb Sebastian Breier:
The problem is that even with all the alpha/beta/rc testing
available to
Ubuntu, the most tests are only done when the release is out.
Yes, a lot of alpha-beta-sonstewas Releases are usually available,
but also yes, they are well hidden
Olá Markus e a todos.
On Monday 07 July 2008 12:18:27 Markus Hitter wrote:
Right now I tried to find downloads and/or upgrade instructions for
the next release, but it's almost impossible to find them beginning
at the main site. There is a menu Community - Get Involved, but no
mention
On Monday 07 July 2008 08:50, Cory K. wrote:
Scott Kitterman wrote:
I think the only path to better tested releases is higher quality test
releases.
Sad fact is people don't install the alpha/betas at the same level as
final. So more actual testing/feedback was done after release. I can
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 08:30:28AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
This is not sustainable in the long term. Before long people will be
saying, Everyone know not to upgrade Ubuntu until the first point
release. Then we don't get the end user base to test until .1 and we have
to bugfix from
Hi,
On Monday 07 July 2008 15:12:13 Scott Kitterman wrote:
[..]
I suspect that we may be in a similar position with Ubuntu. We need to
radically rethink testing and how test results get back into fixes. I
believe that Ubuntu has gotten more complex and we need to match our
test/fix
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alexander Jones wrote:
Thanks, but this wasn't a support request. In the rest of my mail I
tell of how the SCIM input list is entirely independent of the one I
*just configured* with GNOME/xkb.
Yes, they are totally different, because they are
Am Montag, den 07.07.2008, 14:04 +0100 schrieb Matt Zimmerman:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 08:30:28AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
This is not sustainable in the long term. Before long people will be
saying, Everyone know not to upgrade Ubuntu until the first point
release. Then we don't
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 5:06 AM, Sebastian Breier
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem is that even with all the alpha/beta/rc testing available to
Ubuntu, the most tests are only done when the release is out.
There's also no chance whatsoever that the subset of users that
beta-test, even if
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 7:50 AM, Oliver Grawert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
Am Montag, den 07.07.2008, 12:42 +0100 schrieb (``-_-´´) -- Fernando:
* the manual way, rename the source.list hardy mentions to intrepid and do
an apt-get dist-update;
you know that this is highly discouraged since
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Sebastian Breier
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's not that I don't want to test the alphas, it's the fear that I
might not be able to do my work tomorrow.
And separate alpha installs just don't do the testing job. ;)
This is true. I tried to dual boot Edgy when
On 2008/07/07 13:18 (GMT+0200) Markus Hitter apparently typed:
Yes, a lot of alpha-beta-sonstewas Releases are usually available,
but also yes, they are well hidden from the interested person.
FWIW, and I know nothing I say here is likely to change anything, but I
consider Launchpad a
Am 07.07.2008 um 15:12 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
There was some discussion at UDS about developing the ability to
trivially
clone a host machine into a VM so that users could easily test
their setups.
You can do this already. On the host machine, set aside a spare
partition for the OS,
Hi Arne
Good to hear someone is working on a solution. Is there a blueprint or
something I can track?
Many thanks
Alex
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
On 2008/07/07 16:32 (GMT+0200) Markus Hitter apparently typed:
Am 07.07.2008 um 15:12 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
On the host machine, set aside a spare
partition for the OS, and perhaps one for the virtual machine's swap.
Setup your virtual machine to use these two partitions (not the
Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
Oliver Grawert wrote:
(``-_-´´) -- Fernando wrote:
* the manual way, rename the source.list hardy mentions to intrepid and do
an apt-get dist-update;
you know that this is highly discouraged since it wont catch teh special
cases update-manager has functions for ?
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Emmet Hikory [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
Oliver Grawert wrote:
(``-_-´´) -- Fernando wrote:
* the manual way, rename the source.list hardy mentions to intrepid and do
an apt-get dist-update;
you know that this is highly discouraged
2008/7/7 Scott Kitterman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Monday 07 July 2008 08:50, Cory K. wrote:
Sad fact is people don't install the alpha/betas at the same level as
final. So more actual testing/feedback was done after release. I can
tell you for sure this was the case for Ubuntu Studio.
For
Scott Kitterman wrote:
I think the only path to better tested releases is higher quality test
releases.
and later
Personally, I think it means we need to be doing a much better job of testing
and bug fixing as developers.
...
The moral of the story is that my project had increased in
On Monday 07 July 2008 09:04, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 08:30:28AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
This is not sustainable in the long term. Before long people will be
saying, Everyone know not to upgrade Ubuntu until the first point
release. Then we don't get the end
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=769112
NOW people realize that something is wrong with the dev cycle!
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
On Mon, July 7, 2008 9:59 am, Felix Miata wrote:
I'm well past my 15 partition limit in most of my machines. How to you do
it? Only 2-3 distros per machine? 8 disks per machine? Something else?
There is LVM. It has a high learning curve, though.
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
User-Agent:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Luke L [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=769112
NOW people realize that something is wrong with the dev cycle!
I started a discussion on the dev cycle on this list a while back
Mackenzie Morgan [2008-07-07 12:26 -0400]:
The one thing I would like to point out regarding PA is that there
isn't anyone in charge of sound in Ubuntu anymore. After Daniel Chen
stepped down after Feisty, nobody else took over.
Luke Yelavich is taking over audio infrastructure maintenance.
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Martin Pitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mackenzie Morgan [2008-07-07 12:26 -0400]:
The one thing I would like to point out regarding PA is that there
isn't anyone in charge of sound in Ubuntu anymore. After Daniel Chen
stepped down after Feisty, nobody else took
On 2008/07/07 11:20 (GMT-0500) Jason Crain apparently typed:
On Mon, July 7, 2008 9:59 am, Felix Miata wrote:
I'm well past my 15 partition limit in most of my machines. How to you do
it? Only 2-3 distros per machine? 8 disks per machine? Something else?
There is LVM. It has a high
Oliver Grawert pisze:
hi,
Am Montag, den 07.07.2008, 12:42 +0100 schrieb (``-_-´´) -- Fernando:
* the manual way, rename the source.list hardy mentions to intrepid and do an
apt-get dist-update;
you know that this is highly discouraged since it wont catch teh special
cases update-manager has
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:43:44AM -0500, Luke L wrote:
Considerations for an LTS
One idea to prevent such a rush of higher version numbers and new gadgets
from breaking a distro is to use a STS release as an LTS. For
Il giorno lun, 07/07/2008 alle 18.04 +0100, Matt Zimmerman ha scritto:
Instead, we focus on defining a subset of functionality which can be
tested
in practice. You can find the corresponding test plans here:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing along with instructions for how you
can
Hello. In my defense, some of the errors in my essay are due to the
fact that I was new to Ubuntu at the time, and since then I have seen
the effort and complexity of the project. I have also been around the
wiki, and yes, I see that 10.04 is the next LTS :) My freshness to the
subject is the
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008, Emmet Hikory wrote:
This isn't a CLI vs. GUI issue, it's that some upgrade cases don't
work well for special reasons. Some of these are difficult to encode
in terms of provides, conflicts, and replaces, and some are even
impossible. Upgrade Manager (which also has a
On 7/7/08, Evan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would propose a compromise between the current LTS pattern and the
proposed bug-fix only pattern: maintain the current upstream merge, but add
no new packages. That way newer software is still in the repositories (and
thus supported upstream for the
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 01:57:26PM -0400, Daniel Robitaille wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008, Emmet Hikory wrote:
This isn't a CLI vs. GUI issue, it's that some upgrade cases don't
work well for special reasons. Some of these are difficult to encode
in terms of provides, conflicts, and
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Mathias Gug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 01:57:26PM -0400, Daniel Robitaille wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008, Emmet Hikory wrote:
This isn't a CLI vs. GUI issue, it's that some upgrade cases don't
work well for special reasons. Some of
Aside the version number, isn't that just like waiting 6 months on an
LTS we already have? We're not going to dress up 8.04 as a new fancy
release come October, but that's the only difference I think.
No, an example would be using Feisty's packages and codebase to
release 8.04. Almost as if
2008/7/7 Luke L [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
---Using a previous release as a beta for an LTS: Instead of syncing
packages with debian-sid on an LTS, use the packages from the LTS-1
release to find bugs and security holes. That way, when someone gets
the LTS, they know it's been through the wringer.
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Mathias Gug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 01:57:26PM -0400, Daniel Robitaille wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008, Emmet Hikory wrote:
This isn't a CLI vs. GUI issue, it's
On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:57:26 -0400 Daniel Robitaille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
update-manager has a cli client? Never heard of it. How do you call it?
sudo do-release-upgrade
Scott K
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Luke L [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/7/08, Evan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would propose a compromise between the current LTS pattern and the
proposed bug-fix only pattern: maintain the current upstream merge, but
add
no new packages. That way newer
I'm still not following. In October, 8.04 would have been the beta
for an imaginary 8.10 LTS release for 6 months. You can happily ignore
the fact that the real, bleeding edge 8.10 is released.
No?
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:57:26 -0400 Daniel Robitaille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
update-manager has a cli client? Never heard of it. How do you call it?
sudo do-release-upgrade
+1 for the availability of that command
-1 for it's name. Even
On Monday 07 July 2008 14:07, Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Mathias Gug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 01:57:26PM -0400, Daniel Robitaille wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008, Emmet Hikory wrote:
This isn't a CLI vs. GUI issue, it's that some upgrade
hi,
Am Montag, den 07.07.2008, 19:42 +0200 schrieb Przemysław Kulczycki:
Oliver Grawert pisze:
hi,
Am Montag, den 07.07.2008, 12:42 +0100 schrieb (``-_-´´) -- Fernando:
* the manual way, rename the source.list hardy mentions to intrepid and do
an apt-get dist-update;
you know that
2008/7/7 Emmet Hikory [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
While we all tend to be busy much of the time, perhaps there are ways
that we can improve the view of bugs in need of attention, or
otherwise help understand which bugs are likely to be perceived as
painful to users at release time.
I think the single
Am 07.07.2008 um 16:59 schrieb Felix Miata:
On 2008/07/07 16:32 (GMT+0200) Markus Hitter apparently typed:
Then you can clone your OS to this spare partition, unmount it in
Ubuntu and launch your preferred virtual machine off it.
I'm well past my 15 partition limit in most of my machines.
On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 12:25:40AM +0900, Emmet Hikory wrote:
Scott Kitterman wrote:
Setting up an automatic install / upgrade / remove / purge tester
would be good, perhaps using piuparts or similar infrastructure,
although this requires considerable resources in terms of local
storage
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:52:44PM +0300, Timo Jyrinki wrote:
2008/7/7 Emmet Hikory [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
While we all tend to be busy much of the time, perhaps there are ways
that we can improve the view of bugs in need of attention, or
otherwise help understand which bugs are likely to be
2008/7/7 Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Alexander Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm still not following. In October, 8.04 would have been the beta
for an imaginary 8.10 LTS release for 6 months. You can happily ignore
the fact that the real, bleeding edge
Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Monday 07 July 2008 08:50, Cory K. wrote:
Scott Kitterman wrote:
I think the only path to better tested releases is higher quality test
releases.
Sad fact is people don't install the alpha/betas at the same level as
final. So more actual testing/feedback was done
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 06:04:14PM +0100, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
Stability in software
Why is it that 8.04 “LTS” has such a wave of new features and new
versions of software that have not been time-tested to be stable? LTS
releases (meant to be exceptionally stable) should not have so many
2008/7/7 Bryce Harrington [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Frequently upstream decides $TECH is too horribly broken, so they create
$TECH+1 which is often a from-scratch rewrite, which often means trading
one set of bugs for another. Unfortunately, upstream then takes the
step of dropping all ongoing
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Alexander Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It makes me wonder whether synchronised planning for a major cycle
every 2 years would be a good idea to pitch.
I tend to think (perhaps unfoundedly) that we have this problem where,
rarely are more than a few parts of
2008/7/8 Evan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Mark Shuttleworth has already proposed something along these lines. I can't
find it at the moment, but it's in a post somewhere at markshuttleworth.com
I also think this would help significantly.
I believe Mark proposed only a synchronisation on the
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 11:14:59PM +0100, Alexander Jones wrote:
2008/7/7 Bryce Harrington [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Frequently upstream decides $TECH is too horribly broken, so they create
$TECH+1 which is often a from-scratch rewrite, which often means trading
one set of bugs for another.
55 matches
Mail list logo
