Re: Thinking about a "jessie and a half" release
- To: Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves@gmail.com>
- Cc: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>, Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org>, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>, Hideki Yamane <henrich@debian.or.jp>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-release@lists.debian.org, debian-boot@lists.debian.org, debian-arm@lists.debian.org, broonie@sirena.org.uk, debian-backports@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Thinking about a "jessie and a half" release
- From: Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 09:32:37 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20160705083237.GK4792@einval.com>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAD=QJKjuRcGK1qRbrotAWzQJ+TzR=v7JU=vYe+D7FvvzxxdHTw@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <[🔎] 20160704130103.GH4792@einval.com> <[🔎] 20160704131234.GL27496@mraw.org> <[🔎] CAD=QJKjuRcGK1qRbrotAWzQJ+TzR=v7JU=vYe+D7FvvzxxdHTw@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 04:01:10PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>>>
>>> Is anybody else interested in helping? Thoughts/comments?
>
>Yes, it's a project I'm already working on ;-) Is this project a
>candidate for a new Debian Team?
I guess so, yes. :-)
>> 2. Does it have to be called "jessie and a half"? (How much is the
>> concept understood across users? Wouldn't it be a better idea to
>> squeeze the "backports" concept into the name somehow?)
>
>Maybe something like jessie-fresh-unofficial?
I'm definitely *not* thinking of saying this is "unofficial" - I'm
wanting this to be blessed as an additional installation option here.
>On 4 July 2016 at 13:13, Hideki Yamane <henrich@debian.or.jp> wrote:
>>
>> Just a comment. I don't have any objection for this proposal.
>>
>> However, not only half but also updates with some point is better
>> to deliver value for users, I hope it'll be in Stretch cycle.
>>
>> Recently I've read "lean software development" and it's quite
>> impressive for me. "deliver value to users" is one of the most
>> important thing in Debian (it means "do continuous improvement
>> for stable"), IMO.
>
>Agreed! Also, OpenSUSE has been doing this with their post-42.x
>release model. Mind you, to the best of my knowledge Debian has
>always cherry picked fixes and essential hardware enablement fixes for
>the stable packages (eg: intel-microcode). This newly proposed Debian
>project seems to be a more aggressive approach...but does it also have
>a client machine focus to the exclusion of servers, or should it serve
>both?
I'm more concerned about easy installation on new "client" x86
machines at this point, and for arm64 machines in general as they've
seen massive changes since we released jessie. I don't think x86
server machines are such an issue, but I'm open-minded if somebody
wants to argue otherwise.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
"C++ ate my sanity" -- Jon Rabone
Reply to: