Op dinsdag 30 november 2010 13:31:08 schreef Samuel Verschelde: > Hi, > > I would like to discuss the support policy for Mageia. > > It would be interesting to know (or decide) where Mageia is heading, given > our limited resources : 1) focus on stability and security : few very well > equally supported packages. Apparently, this is where we're going for now. > May be wise as a start, but I hope this is not our final destination, > because it means either very limited choice, or progressive diminution of > quality of support if the number of packages increases faster than the > dedicated resources. 2) focus on choice : many packages, but no support > policy. This would be really bad, I think we're not heading there, from > what I read. However, this is a danger if we start from option 1) and then > open wide the gates for importing packages, without setting a support > policy. 3) focus on both (this is my option). There would be 2 levels of > support : - top guaranteed support : those are the (few at start) packages > your can rely on almost blindly, they'll be updated in a timely manner, > and updates don't break things. Those are the packages the QA Team puts > its limited resources on (doesn't mean the QA Team provides the support > themselves, this is maintainer work, but they check that good support is > provided) : testing, helping the maintainers to watch for security > problems... The maintainers are responsible for their package, but the QA > Team double-checks updates for stable releases. - supported packages > (every other package) : those are maintained packages, however the QA Team > doesn't have to check them. It's up to the maintainer to check the package > and updates quality. - unsupported packages are dropped. > > Are we heading for 1), 2), 3), or any other option ? > > Of course, with unlimited resources, options 1 and 3 would be equivalent, > everything would have the "top guaranteed support" :) > > Best regards > > Samuel Verschelde > Packager/QA Team/User
having read misc's lenghty and almost political proposal, i suggest a 4th option (even though i'm not part of QAteam either): 4) dynamically distributed focus: - level 1: BuildSystem-required packages (all packages used for buildnodes) - level 2: everything that is minimally required to boot and do stuff - level 3: popular server packages - level 4: release focus (everything that's defaultly installed by a release) - level 4b: stage images - level 5: the rest depending on resources and certain timings; focus should be spread according to desires at that time. eg: - i imagine that level 1 could be discussed between sysadm and qateam during BS-updates - i imagine that level 2 would be the primary focus - i imagine that level 4 could be more important during release times - i imagine that level 5 would probably not be focussed by QA unless unlimited resources - i imagine that level 3 would probably be good if resources would be growing, and possibly level 4 if there's enough resources. - i agree that testing should be open to anyone - i agree that karma could not be a bad idea, but suggest that QAteam give more karma (perhaps even on the karmic state of that person) - i also would suggest that at the time of alpha release, we should do a contest on testing and bugfinding; so that we could gather enough testers; and possibly even extra packagers or qateam people. WDYT?