Re: [Sugar-devel] Roadmap to 0.88 --- Proposal

[Walter Bender]

Be nice to go a step further and (optionally) put the entire Fedora
source on the helper CD as well (if it will fit).

-walter

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Tim McNamara
 wrote:
>
>
> 2009/11/25 Simon Schampijer 
>>
>> On 11/20/2009 06:43 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
>> > Great job!!
>> >
>> > -walter
>>
>> Any more thoughts? Pros and Cons? Things I have overseen? Wishes?
>>
>
> Simon, et al
>
> This may be a SoaS issue, but I will press on nevertheless. I would like
> Fedora man pages included into Sugar. I see this as being a critical part of
> low floor, no ceiling. Decent documentation about the features the OS and
> how to run its advanced features is part of that.
>
> While I would like it to be on all Sugar installations, I think we have more
> flexibility with HDD space as deployers with SoaS.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> @timClicks
>
> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
>



-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Roadmap to 0.88 --- Proposal

[Tim McNamara]

2009/11/25 Simon Schampijer 

> On 11/20/2009 06:43 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> > Great job!!
> >
> > -walter
>
> Any more thoughts? Pros and Cons? Things I have overseen? Wishes?
>
>
Simon, et al

This may be a SoaS issue, but I will press on nevertheless. I would like
Fedora man pages included into Sugar. I see this as being a critical part of
low floor, no ceiling. Decent documentation about the features the OS and
how to run its advanced features is part of that.

While I would like it to be on all Sugar installations, I think we have more
flexibility with HDD space as deployers with SoaS.

Any thoughts?

@timClicks
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Roadmap to 0.88 --- Proposal

[Simon Schampijer]

On 11/20/2009 06:43 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> Great job!!
>
> -walter

Any more thoughts? Pros and Cons? Things I have overseen? Wishes?

Otherwise I will set the roadmap in stone and move on with the process.

Thanks,
Simon
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Roadmap to 0.88 --- Proposal

[Simon Schampijer]

On 11/21/2009 11:51 AM, Mathieu Bridon (bochecha) wrote:
>> - Testing: I hope to see much much more testing in this release cycle.
>> Two things should help here: a) I encourage the creation of a testing
>> team. b) The 0.88 release will be packaged early. For testing purposes
>> 0.88 will be packaged for F12. Other distributions are encouraged to do
>> similar.
>
> Do you really want to package an unstable release (for testing
> purpose) into a stable distribution?
>
> Some people might actually be using the stable distribution, and they
> might not be really pleased by having some
> work-in-progress-please-test release forced upon them. :-/
>
> Unless you're talking about packaging 0.88 for F12 but not actually
> pushing it to the stable repository?

Right. Sorry for the confusion. I meant to make the packages available, 
so people willing to test can add the yum repo and update. Or use for 
example a dedicated Soas version with the 0.88 packages.

Thanks for helping to make this clear,
Simon
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Roadmap to 0.88 --- Proposal

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:51:58AM +0100, Mathieu Bridon (bochecha) wrote:
- Testing: I hope to see much much more testing in this release 
cycle. Two things should help here: a) I encourage the creation of a 
testing team. b) The 0.88 release will be packaged early. For testing 
purposes 0.88 will be packaged for F12. Other distributions are 
encouraged to do similar.


Do you really want to package an unstable release (for testing
purpose) into a stable distribution?

Some people might actually be using the stable distribution, and they
might not be really pleased by having some
work-in-progress-please-test release forced upon them. :-/


Well, it is not necessarily "forced upon them": some (more than one?) 
distros package multiple branches of Sugar concurrently (but allows only 
one of them to be installed at a time due to limitations of Sugar coding 
design).



Kind regards,

 - Jonas

Packaging Sucrose 0.84, 0.86 and 0.88 concurrently for Debian

--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Roadmap to 0.88 --- Proposal

[David Van Assche]

Well, most other distros do it... its a great way (only way I can think of)
of showing what's going to be included in the future, but just not
recommened to be runnning in a production environment. In any case, right
now, most locations are pilots that benefit from seeing what's coming up...

kinid Reards,
David Van assche

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Mathieu Bridon (bochecha) <
boche...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> > - Testing: I hope to see much much more testing in this release cycle.
> > Two things should help here: a) I encourage the creation of a testing
> > team. b) The 0.88 release will be packaged early. For testing purposes
> > 0.88 will be packaged for F12. Other distributions are encouraged to do
> > similar.
>
> Do you really want to package an unstable release (for testing
> purpose) into a stable distribution?
>
> Some people might actually be using the stable distribution, and they
> might not be really pleased by having some
> work-in-progress-please-test release forced upon them. :-/
>
> Unless you're talking about packaging 0.88 for F12 but not actually
> pushing it to the stable repository?
>
>
> --
>
> Mathieu Bridon (bochecha)
> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>



-- 

Pablo Picasso
- "Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Roadmap to 0.88 --- Proposal

[Mathieu Bridon (bochecha)]

> - Testing: I hope to see much much more testing in this release cycle.
> Two things should help here: a) I encourage the creation of a testing
> team. b) The 0.88 release will be packaged early. For testing purposes
> 0.88 will be packaged for F12. Other distributions are encouraged to do
> similar.

Do you really want to package an unstable release (for testing
purpose) into a stable distribution?

Some people might actually be using the stable distribution, and they
might not be really pleased by having some
work-in-progress-please-test release forced upon them. :-/

Unless you're talking about packaging 0.88 for F12 but not actually
pushing it to the stable repository?


--

Mathieu Bridon (bochecha)
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Roadmap to 0.88 --- Proposal

[Walter Bender]

Great job!!

-walter

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Simon Schampijer  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have written a proposal for the new 0.88 schedule [1]. Basically, I
> followed the GNOME schedule for 2.30 [2]. Following in terms of dates,
> and I have added certain new freezes we did not have before.
>
> In detail:
> - tarballs due will be on Mondays, and the release on Wednesdays: I hope
> this will allow us to see the tarballs packaged by the end of the week
> by the distributions ---> getting more testing done over the weekend
>
> - UI Freeze added: No UI changes may be made without approval from the
> release-team and notification to the documentation list. Having such a
> freeze helps documentation efforts, and to not introduce workflow
> regressions and issues late in the cycle.
>
> - The feature freeze and API freeze is earlier compared to previous
> cycles. This should help to get a more stable release at the envisioned
> release date. After this shortened release cycle, from one feature
> freeze to the next one, there will be always 6 months. So the same
> amount of time to allow for development of features.
>
> - To allow for long term planning, I have drafted the 0.90 schedule, too
> [3]. This should help to schedule bigger features.
>
> - Testing: I hope to see much much more testing in this release cycle.
> Two things should help here: a) I encourage the creation of a testing
> team. b) The 0.88 release will be packaged early. For testing purposes
> 0.88 will be packaged for F12. Other distributions are encouraged to do
> similar.
>
> - Feature Process: We will follow the process [4] defined in the 0.86
> cycle. It will be communicated another time.
>
> - Getting it into a release: As we follow the same schedule as GNOME is,
> we should have no issues in getting our packages into the distributions
> in time. See the F13 [5] for example.
>
>
> Comments welcome,
>    Simon
>
>
> [1] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.88/Roadmap#Schedule
> [2] http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointTwentynine
> [3] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.88/Roadmap#Schedule
> [4] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Policy
> [5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/13/Schedule
> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>



-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

[Sugar-devel] Roadmap to 0.88 --- Proposal

[Simon Schampijer]

Hi,

I have written a proposal for the new 0.88 schedule [1]. Basically, I 
followed the GNOME schedule for 2.30 [2]. Following in terms of dates, 
and I have added certain new freezes we did not have before.

In detail:
- tarballs due will be on Mondays, and the release on Wednesdays: I hope 
this will allow us to see the tarballs packaged by the end of the week 
by the distributions ---> getting more testing done over the weekend

- UI Freeze added: No UI changes may be made without approval from the 
release-team and notification to the documentation list. Having such a 
freeze helps documentation efforts, and to not introduce workflow 
regressions and issues late in the cycle.

- The feature freeze and API freeze is earlier compared to previous 
cycles. This should help to get a more stable release at the envisioned 
release date. After this shortened release cycle, from one feature 
freeze to the next one, there will be always 6 months. So the same 
amount of time to allow for development of features.

- To allow for long term planning, I have drafted the 0.90 schedule, too 
[3]. This should help to schedule bigger features.

- Testing: I hope to see much much more testing in this release cycle. 
Two things should help here: a) I encourage the creation of a testing 
team. b) The 0.88 release will be packaged early. For testing purposes 
0.88 will be packaged for F12. Other distributions are encouraged to do 
similar.

- Feature Process: We will follow the process [4] defined in the 0.86 
cycle. It will be communicated another time.

- Getting it into a release: As we follow the same schedule as GNOME is, 
we should have no issues in getting our packages into the distributions 
in time. See the F13 [5] for example.


Comments welcome,
Simon


[1] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.88/Roadmap#Schedule
[2] http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointTwentynine
[3] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.88/Roadmap#Schedule
[4] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Policy
[5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/13/Schedule
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel