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

Re: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy


Below an update of the release goals I advocated and some thoughts on

> Release Goals
> -------------
> As a first step towards establishing release goals for wheezy, we will
be reviewing
> each of the goals which we had for squeeze [RDO:SGoals] to see which
have been achieved and which
> may no longer be relevant for other reasons.
> If you are listed as the proponent for a goal in the above list,
please feel free to
> provide a status update on progress towards completing it and whether
you believe it is
> relevant for the wheezy cycle.  You can also e-mail us to propose a
new goal, including
> a description of the goal and an indication of how progress on the
issues may be tracked
> (e.g. a pointer to a set of appropriate user-tagged bugs).

# bootperformance
  Advocate: Petter Reinholdsen and Luk Claes
  State: confirmed
  Wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/BootPerformance

The main part of this goal was achieved, though there are some possible
improvements both regarding boot reliability and boot performance that
could still be aimed for.

Regarding reliability I'm doing some work regarding NFS, though one of
the main outstanding issues is the race between availability of the
network devices and the end of the network init script AFAICS. It would
also not be a bad idea to have a discussion on whether the default init
system should change to one that is more suitable to guarantee the
reliability of the boot like upstart or systemd.

Regarding boot performance there is quite some work done by Ubuntu in
different packages, so maybe it would not be bad to have a look at how
Ubuntu and Debian could get more in sync on that.

# package quality
  Advocate: Holger Levsen and Luk Claes
  State: confirmed
  Wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/PackagesQuality

This is a never ending goal of sustaining our packages quality by
improving our tests and following up closely... so needless to say that
I would still advocate this one.

# remove obsolete libraries
  Advocate: Barry deFreese and Luk Claes
  State: confirmed
  Wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/RemoveOldLibs

This worked quite well and should continue so we can get rid of obsolete
libraries IMHO. One of the main candidates are the old db libraries,
though there are also still some old gnome libraries and without doubt

> We're also after new goals! I know that expressions of interest in
multiarch and
> tdebs have already been indicated, but if you have something you would
want to
> see happen for Wheezy, please let us know. The release team itself will be
> suggesting some as part of the review above.

I'm definitely in favour of having multiarch finally happen!

For the IPv6 and LFS legacy release goals I think it would be best if we
would welcome massive (automatic?) tests to find all of the outstanding
issues and get them fixed finally!

I would welcome a review of essential, required and standard though I
don't know if many would welcome such an initiative which could
potentially have quite some impact without much visible gain. Anyway
it's something which should happen in the beginning of the cycle (after
a discussion with both the involved maintainers as well as the
developers body at large) or not at all IMHO.



Reply to: