Generally in favour here, and i saw no significant opposite opinions when we've informally discussed this in Kubuntu.
Rik Mills Kubuntu Devel Kubuntu Council On 09/04/18 02:46, Simon Quigley wrote: > Hello, > > This past cycle was interesting, with Spectre/Meltdown complications > among other things causing the first two Alphas to be cancelled, and on > the Lubuntu side of things, we missed Beta 1 because of a critical bug > that wasn't noticed due to lack of testing. This cycle made me question > the purpose and usefulness of the milestones in a release cycle. > > If we do e.g. Alpha 1 as a community, these images are frozen in time > and are said to be "safe to install" when in reality, further bugfixes > can be spun in the daily ISO less than 24 hours later, making that > milestone and the several days leading up to it something which will > just be paved over the next day. In reality, due to the Proposed > Migration procedures we have set in place, the release pocket should > *always* be installable and working. Effort could be better spent making > sure that the tests for these packages are better and that continuous > integration is improved all around, rather than just hard freezing the > archive and doing manual tests for some flavors, which often times > blocks the work of others. > > I wanted to see if my thoughts were shared, and after speaking to > several people from different flavors (albeit fairly informally, so > these should not be treated as final opinions, but from Xubuntu, Ubuntu > MATE, Kubuntu, and Ubuntu Budgie) regarding the state of milestones in > the archive, it seemed like we shared common points, and it was clear to > me that it would be a good idea to formally propose some change in these > procedures. > > I am proposing that we get rid of the Alpha and Beta 1 milestones > entirely, and we organize a monthly testing "week" (Tuesday through > Thursday), which involves no archive freezes, no formally released ISOs, > but testing of every product (community and Canonical) that is typically > shipped as part of a final release (so including Desktop and Server). > The goal would be to ensure that any issues are ironed out early on, to > foster collaboration between people (Canonical, community, and everyone > in between) regarding what's working and what isn't thus far in the > cycle, and plans for the rest of the cycle (possibly via a short mailing > list thread, something on the community hub, or whatever happens to work). > > So a (tentative) schedule would look like this for 18.10: > 1. At the beginning of the cycle, the usual toolchain uploads are done, > the autosyncer is turned on, and the "floodgates" are opened. This could > potentially take us to the end of May, depending on how many transitions > are started, what kind of changes are coming in from Debian, how quickly > people can get things organized/migrated, and when Mark decides to > announce the Calculating Camel. If the archive is consistent enough by > the last weekend of May (26th/27th), we could do an organized testing > session from then (so, the 29th through the 31st). This makes sure that > once all of the transitions are finalized "for now" that nothing broke > between the Bionic DIF and that point. > 2. By the latter half of June, we have hit the Feat. Def. Freeze for > some packages in Main, and the transitions which started from the > floodgates being opened should be calmed down. The last week of June > (26th through the 28th) could be another coordinated testing period. > 3. In comes July, which is really the last full month you can land > features that should be included in the 18.10 release, according to the > usual timing of the release cycle. We would do coordinated testing that > last week as well (24th through the 26th). Any last transitions could be > discussed which affect everyone and could be landed in time for Feature > Freeze. > 4. Feature Freeze comes in on the week of August 23rd, ish. That would > put coordinated testing right after that (28th through the 30th), and > makes it important for there to be testing, because we can assume that > features are no longer the primary focus of the flavors for the upcoming > release. If upstream release cycles for common components happen to line > up in a way which makes it desirable to ship in a release, that could be > discussed. Otherwise, deep testing of edge cases (unusual install > methods come to mind right away) would become a more specific goal, so > we can ensure that the final release is as bug-free as possible. > 5. In between that and the latter end of September would be UIF and > the Documentation String Freeze. Additionally, this is also the > typical spot of Final Beta, and the goal (since we didn't release a > "Beta 1") would be to release an image, but call it "18.10 Beta" (thus > removing versioned betas and just declaring it to be a "beta"). The > archive would freeze as normal, Beta images would be released, and the > archive would enter the usual semi-frozen state where seeded packages > need manual approval. From this point on, the release cycle would > proceed as it always has. > > Thoughts? > >  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ProposedMigration >  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebianImportFreeze >  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FeatureDefinitionFreeze >  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UserInterfaceFreeze >  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DocumentationStringFreeze > > > -- Ubuntu-release mailing list Ubuntufirstname.lastname@example.org Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release