[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Release cycle length (was: General Resolution: Force AMD64 into Sarge)

Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > Short release cycles are not good. IMHO, Debian should aim for release
> > > cycles not shorter than one year and not too much over two years. The
> > > entire point of stable, AFAIK, is its code stability. When one installs
> > > a distribution on a server or production machine, then it is not very
> > > disirable to update that every few months (of course, security updates
> > > are a different story).
> > 
> > Is it better to make small scale, manageable upgrades on a production
> > server every 6 months, or to wait 2+ years and make an absolutely
> > massive upgrade in which you're jumping from 2-3 year old software to
> > current software?
> The latter.
> Upgrade == downtime. Downtime every six months -> no.

Then you can do several smaller consecutive upgrades instead of one
large one, as long as security updates are available for the oldest

From an administration POV, that's a bit more effort to handle, but
OTOH it makes smooth package upgrades more likely. It trades more
routine work for less breakage potential.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: