PDA

View Full Version : I propose a slightly modified release schedule.



Mazza558
April 25th, 2008, 11:30 PM
With some of the problems plaguing Hardy's release and preventing some people from getting it working (e.g buggy b43 drivers, firefox beta 5, ndiswrapper script at startup), I think there should be new system based not only on time, but people's opinions on whether it should be released or not. The 6 month schedule should stay, but at the time of the final release, a poll is made for all people currently testing the latest version, simply asking them if they think it's ready to be released. People should be asked to vote based on how much effort it took to get things working for them - e.g if most things worked out of the box. If less than 70% of people think it's ready, the release is delayed by a week in order to continue with bug fixes.

The next week, a second poll is cast, asking the same question, and the same process occurs again.

At the end of the 3rd week of bug-fixing (if needed), the new version is packaged and released.

aysiu
April 26th, 2008, 12:09 AM
I'm really surprised to see this coming from someone who's join date was October 2005 (two and a half years ago). Every release, there are a significant number of folks who think the release is too buggy to be released. If we did this poll method, Ubuntu wouldn't release a new version... ever. Or, Ubuntu would be like Debian and have a rock solid release every few years that had extremely outdated software.

If people want rock solid releases, they should stick with older ones (which have had plenty of time to have the kinks worked out of them). Dapper was delayed two months and was extremely unstable on release date anyway. They would have done better to stick with the six-month release schedule and just be less ambitious - saving major changes for Edgy.

madjr
April 26th, 2008, 12:14 AM
i had a poll up and most of them said it was ready

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=764132

50% testers said it was the best
27% said it was ready, but with minor issues
11% said to polish their bugs (but probably worked somehow)
10% said it didn't work and had major issues.


however, if it were the other way around they would probably had release it anyway...

Unless there were a huge forum rant

Joeb454
April 26th, 2008, 12:21 AM
I've found it to be stable on any machine I've installed on (started installing it from the Beta stages).

Mazza558
April 26th, 2008, 12:31 AM
If we did this poll method, Ubuntu wouldn't release a new version... ever. Or, Ubuntu would be like Debian and have a rock solid release every few years that had extremely outdated software.


I'm not proposing to carry on giving the poll every week, just the first 2 or 3 weeks after the proposed release date (if it's needed at all).

Lostincyberspace
April 26th, 2008, 12:34 AM
I would not do that but I do support the june and december releases dates it is during more stable developing times april and september everyone is really doing alot but at those time few are doing as much.

FyreBrand
April 26th, 2008, 12:45 AM
I'm not really for the poll idea. If there was a serious issue (possibly based on tester feedback or internal testing) that couldn't be patched in a reasonable time then I would say the developers could make a decision to delay. I personally don't have enough confidence in a forum poll to take it seriously enough to use it as a basis for modifying a development timeline.

For example I don't personally feel the release of FF3 Beta is a bad thing especially since it will see a final release patch soon. I don't think it's optimal to have released it like that but I also don't think it's a deal breaker at all.

bruce89
April 26th, 2008, 01:03 AM
People would only bother voting if they had something to moan about.

Biochem
April 26th, 2008, 01:43 AM
So I install the Beta a month before release and have some issues I have dificulties with but manage to fix them.

On release week how will I know that the problem is fix?

Or how will I know that some new bug would prevent me from installing or upgrading this time?

therefore how will we be able to make an informed vote on the poll. The only option would be to do a fresh install.

IMHO would not be a reliable system and would cause more problem than solve.

Beside the launch day bugs are probably those that are not common enought to be seen by the small community of beta tester. Therefore you will still have them.

Tundro Walker
April 26th, 2008, 02:35 AM
I'm not really for the poll idea. If there was a serious issue (possibly based on tester feedback or internal testing) that couldn't be patched in a reasonable time then I would say the developers could make a decision to delay. I personally don't have enough confidence in a forum poll to take it seriously enough to use it as a basis for modifying a development timeline.

For example I don't personally feel the release of FF3 Beta is a bad thing especially since it will see a final release patch soon. I don't think it's optimal to have released it like that but I also don't think it's a deal breaker at all.

I second that. If the beta testers found an issue 10 days before roll-out, and the dev's didn't think they could get it fixed, they'd either delay roll-out, or postpone that fix for the next release.

Canonical & Ubuntu dev's are trying to do away with some of the "waffling around" other distros do in releasing "when it's ready". While it sounds nice to say, folks will get impatient, and the crowd is mixed with a diversified bunch. You'll have some folks who would like to have it even if it's a little buggy, but others are absolute anal-retentive perfectionists. So, if the release schedule was left up to a public opinion poll ... it'd be a bit crazy.

The community tests and provides feedback, which gets us involved, but Canonical provides a more corporate-style structure to the release and development of the distro. I personally think that's a win-win combination.

And, I agree with them plugging in Firefox 3 beta in right now. Compiz was still a bit beta when they added it to Edgy. There may be a few bugs, but it basically upgraded the foundation that that house is built on. I'd rather have it now then wait until Firefox 3.6 is ready by next October and we're already behind the curve.

kevdog
April 26th, 2008, 02:40 AM
Ubuntu is a work-in progress. The actual release dates in my mind mean nothing. Its just a release of where the distribution is at the moment. Again I haven't yet upgraded to Hardy. Let the other people figure out the issues right now, and I'll come along in a few weeks (just as you proposed), and then upgrade after the hoopla.

Perhaps instead of a poll, you should just advocate that everyone just upgrade 3-4 weeks after the release date. That would seem like the wiser piece of advice.

cardinals_fan
April 26th, 2008, 02:46 AM
And, I agree with them plugging in Firefox 3 beta in right now. Compiz was still a bit beta when they added it to Edgy. There may be a few bugs, but it basically upgraded the foundation that that house is built on. I'd rather have it now then wait until Firefox 3.6 is ready by next October and we're already behind the curve.
Compiz wasn't added until Feisty ;)

keykero
April 26th, 2008, 03:31 AM
Well, the point about using Debian if you want stability is pretty hard to argue with. By choosing Ubuntu you choose the possibility that your machine is going to have trouble with the latest cutting edge technology that they pack into it. HH had kernel changes right down to the wire, but you could always scroll down and boot into an older kernel. I certainly wouldn't put it on a world-facing server, that is what Debian & CentOS are for.

23meg
April 26th, 2008, 04:10 AM
I personally don't have enough confidence in a forum poll to take it seriously enough to use it as a basis for modifying a development timeline.


+1

The poll would be meaningless, since the small group of people who start complaining about the release in the last few weeks are always immediately countered by an overwhelmingly larger "It works for me" chorus. "It works for me so it must be good" would always defeat "It doesn't work for me so it must be bad", and we'd have a meaningless duel of non-arguments that always yields the same result: positive.

In a group dominated by people who judge by self-centric and anecdotal observations rather than concrete technicalities, polls are populist by definition; every poll is skewed towards popular opinion, anecdotal half-truth and passing observation to the point of being of no real use.

Tundro Walker
April 26th, 2008, 08:34 AM
Perhaps instead of a poll, you should just advocate that everyone just upgrade 3-4 weeks after the release date. That would seem like the wiser piece of advice.

Better yet, I can see the headlines now ...

Mark Shuttleworth Announces Ubuntu to Follow "Duke Nukem Forever"-style Release Schedule

"We'll release it when it's done. Right now, it's not done. So, we're not releasing it. But, we promise it will be so cool and amazing when it gets done. It'll be unbelievable. But, we're not done yet. So, check back next year."

- Mark Shuttleworth


*cough*vapor-ware*cough*

(There would be 2 sounds heard on the forums from that kind of announcement. 1) a collective groan of the entire community, 2) the shuffling of feet out the proverbial door as we all go look for another distro to use.)

Eisenwinter
April 26th, 2008, 08:53 AM
Perhaps instead of a poll, you should just advocate that everyone just upgrade 3-4 weeks after the release date. That would seem like the wiser piece of advice.
I'll assume that by "Everyone", you mean every single Ubuntu user.

Lets say "everyone" upgraded 3 weeks after the release, the same problems would still be there, unfixed.

Why? because the sooner people upgrade, the sooner they can find bugs which went unseen by public and internal beta tests, and report them.

If you have everyone upgrade 3 weeks later, it'd be like the first few days of each release we have now, only it'll happen 3 weeks later.