Le mardi 05 octobre 2010 à 20:17 +0200, Ahmad Samir a écrit : > On 5 October 2010 19:53, Tux 99 <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Ahmad Samir wrote: > > > >> I looked at the description that Michael gave. And I think I know what > >> a rolling distro is having Cooker and all :). light/heavy makes no > >> sense here. > > > > I give up, i'm not sure if it's a communication problem or if you are > > simply pretending not to understand to wind us up. > > > > Well, according to you I don't understand what you're saying, and also > Michael doesn't understand what you're saying, but maybe it's > coincidence?
Well, let's try to be constructive. For all people interested into having a rolling release or a core based distribution, I propose that they write a document explaining : - the release process ( ie, what you put on iso ) - based on what criteria - time based ? - regular snapshot ? - features based ? - how to decide what packages are upgraded day to day - what criteria for what kind of upgrade ( version upgrade, patch upgrade ) - what procedure for upgrade ( test stage, direct upgrade ? ) - for how long - how are updates built ( ie, against what tree ) - what packages are not upgraded , unless there is a release, if there is one - what criteria warrant the stability of this component - how do we decide it will be upgraded Once people are able to produce this document, we will all be able to be on the same wavelength. -- Michael Scherer
