Hi Scott, On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 06:25:28PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > Finally, there's one other point that I think we should discuss regarding > > the opt-in freezes. The current model for opt-in milestones is that we > > freeze all those packages which are used by any of the opting flavors. I > > don't think this is in the spirit of the original compromise that was > > proposed, however - particularly since two of the flavors that have been > > doing opt-in milestones, UbuntuKylin and Edubuntu, are deriving directly > > from the ubuntu desktop seed, with the result that for beta-1, all of Ubuntu > > Desktop was frozen. I don't think this is a reasonable outcome; the Ubuntu > > Desktop team are explicitly *not* participating in these milestones in > > order to maintain development velocity, and it's not fair to them to have > > flavors that are "downstream" of them imposing a freeze on their work.
> > I think it's fine for Edubuntu and UbuntuKylin to participate in the opt-in > > milestones, but we shouldn't freeze the Ubuntu Desktop packages for this. > > They can choose to freeze the packages that are part of their overlay, but > > where the Ubuntu Desktop packages are concerned, there should be a level of > > trust in the CI methodologies that we have put in place for the Ubuntu > > Desktop itself, instead of freezes whose effect is to reduce alignment > > between Ubuntu and the other flavors. > I guess a lot of that revolves around the question of how people feel about > releasing install media with obsolete packages on them. We've gotten more > relaxed about that in recent cycles without any problems I'm aware of. > OTOH, part of the reason for uploading to proposed was to allow teams to > continue to work through these things. I don't understand how two days of > not migrating has any significant affect on development velocity. AIUI, > the benefit for non-participating flavors is that developers don't need to > stop their normal work and test/fix issues associated with the milestone. > The larger effect on velocity comes from what people spend their time on > and not on if a package migrates from -proposed or not. Having packages frozen in -proposed still negatively impacts velocity, because nothing in -proposed is being used by the developers and other users; a full development iteration means the changes need to reach the release pocket, where they can be used by developers and other users, incorporated into images, and subjected to additional image-based integration testing. It certainly helps to be able to upload to -proposed instead of not being able to upload at all, but the milestone freeze does still slow down development. And in this context, I think it's an unnecessary slowdown. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- Ubuntu-release mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
