Re: towards a lenny release, part 2
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 01:38:22PM +0800, Holger Levsen wrote:
> the following timeline just occured to me:
>
> Sunday, 11th of October:
> Release Candidate 1
> Release whatever we have, to get familar with and document the
> release process (build images, archive them, update documents)
>
> Sunday, 25th of October:
> Release Candidate 2
> Release a real candidate which we can use as a basis for testing
> and writing documentation at the gathering in Oslo
>
> Suaturday, 14th of November
> Release Debian Edu 5.0.3+edu0 Codename "Lenny"
> Cheers!!!
>
>
> Please join the party and make it happen!!! ;-)
>
> I think this timeline is entirely possible, if we concentrate on it and find
> and squeeze the remaining bugs and accompany this with solid testing - what
> do you think?
as already said on IRC, I would like to have a test release first.
My proposal would be something like this:
First test release (5.0.3edu0 alpha0) ASAP:
This is mainly missing the release notes. The first steps could be
found in the wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/ReleaseNotes
A second problem is, that I found a regression (popup messages about
removable devices pluged into the LTSP server are send to non-local
users) which is fixed in lenny-test and should therefore also be
fixed in lenny, which now has the same package versions (of the
relevant packages). Maybe this is just a problem of my test install,
I'm currently investigating this.
Maybe more test releases depending on how many/what bugs are found.
Fix new/remaining bugs in Oslo.
Release a Release Candidate early in November (if releasable).
Depending on bugs fixed release more Release Candidates.
Aim to release in the end of November.
As you can see I do not have hard dates as Holger does, but I would like
to get a first test release out of the door real soon now, to get some
reports to work on in Oslo.
That are just my 2 cent and what I am working on currently.
Hope to hear more options and see more people to join the effort.
Regards,
Daniel
Reply to: