First Draft Development Process Proposal

[C. Scott Ananian]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:22 AM,  <pgf at laptop.org> wrote:
> c. scott ananian wrote:
>  > On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 6:01 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
>  > <mpgritti at gmail.com> wrote:
>  > > On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 5:07 AM, C. Scott Ananian <cscott at laptop.org> wrote:
>  > >> and I formally request synchronizing our release schedule
>  > >> with Fedora's.
>  > >
>  > > That would be good, how can we do it though? A short 8.3 in November
>  > > this year to get in sync?
>
> why is it necessary or optimal that we track every fedora release?
> it seems like a requirement that's both ambitious, and somewhat
> arbitrary.

I personally think that it's good to keep your upstream (like your
enemies) close -- but I agree that it's not strictly necessary for
every release.  I do think it's important to have a well-defined
relationship with our upstream, though, and since 6-month schedules
were being proposed it makes sense to think about how that lines up
with Fedora's 6-month schedules.

Perhaps you'd like my second, 4-month, proposal better, which gives us
a "day off" from following fedora once in a while.  Or, returning to
the 6-month proposal, if the November schedule ends up squeezing us
too much because of the holidays, propose that we follow every *other*
Fedora release, skipping the Fedora release that happens in November.

I personally don't have a strong opinion which of these we do
(although I suspect Dennis does, since the burden of keeping us in
sync with upstream seems to be falling mostly on him), but I do
strongly feel that we should have a well-defined and consistent
relationship with Fedora's schedule, whatever that turns out to mean.
 --scott

-- 
 ( http://cscott.net/ )