feature freeze dates for 10.2

In order not to do again the mistakes made with the zen
update and 10.1, I think we should have _two_ feature freeze
dates...

One for the _new things_ (patterns, Xorg 7...) and one for
the _new releases_ of already used things (Kde, Gnome)

I think the latter are already tested by they developpers
when the first seems already in a very early stage.

I'm disquieted by the "most annoying bugs" list and the _may
be_ delayed Alpha 3.

I personnally think that a stable distribution is better
than the very most up to date one.

an other solution should be to use a debian like calendar (I
speak of the three distros, stable, unstable and testing,
not of the delay between releases :-)

jdd
--
http://www.dodin.net
http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html
http://lucien.dodin.net
http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

[Dominique Leuenberger-2]

>>> [hidden email] 10-08-2006 14:45 >>>

>In order not to do again the mistakes made with the zen

>update and 10.1, I think we should have _two_ feature freeze
>dates...
>
>One for the _new things_ (patterns, Xorg 7...) and one for
>the _new releases_ of already used things (Kde, Gnome)
>
>I think the latter are already tested by they developpers
>when the first seems already in a very early stage.
>
>I'm disquieted by the "most annoying bugs" list and the _may
>be_ delayed Alpha 3.
>
>I personnally think that a stable distribution is better

.than the very most up to date one.

Hi,

 

I was also very concerned when I saw the 'most annoying bugs' list today (as I epxected Alpha 3).

The worst that can happen to openSUSE is having (again) a release with bugs like the updater in 10.1. Even though they are fixed now, it's still around and poeple installing without an internet connection most obviosuly run into it.

 

If the schedule for 10.2 should be kept like this (which I think it should) then we should try to put bugs away instead of adding last-minute-features and packages. Some might be solved with new packages, some might not.

 

Dominique

[Marcus Meissner]

On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 02:29:36PM +0200, Dominique Leuenberger wrote:

> >>> [hidden email] 10-08-2006 14:45 >>>
> >In order not to do again the mistakes made with the zen
> >update and 10.1, I think we should have _two_ feature freeze
> >dates...
> >
> >One for the _new things_ (patterns, Xorg 7...) and one for
> >the _new releases_ of already used things (Kde, Gnome)
> >
> >I think the latter are already tested by they developpers
> >when the first seems already in a very early stage.
> >
> >I'm disquieted by the "most annoying bugs" list and the _may
> >be_ delayed Alpha 3.
> >
> >I personnally think that a stable distribution is better
> .than the very most up to date one.
>
> Hi,
>  
> I was also very concerned when I saw the 'most annoying bugs' list
> today (as I epxected Alpha 3).

We have Alpha3. Bugs are expected ;)

> The worst that can happen to openSUSE is having (again) a release with
> bugs like the updater in 10.1. Even though they are fixed now, it's
> still around and poeple installing without an internet connection most
> obviosuly run into it.
>  
> If the schedule for 10.2 should be kept like this (which I think it
> should) then we should try to put bugs away instead of adding
> last-minute-features and packages. Some might be solved with new
> packages, some might not.

Its definitely not last minute for 10.2 yet.

CIao, Marcus

[Silviu Marin-Caea-2]

On Thursday 10 August 2006 15:27, Marcus Meissner wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 02:29:36PM +0200, Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
> > >>> [hidden email] 10-08-2006 14:45 >>>
> > >
> > >In order not to do again the mistakes made with the zen
> > >update and 10.1, I think we should have _two_ feature freeze
> > >dates...
> > >
> > >One for the _new things_ (patterns, Xorg 7...) and one for
> > >the _new releases_ of already used things (Kde, Gnome)
> > >
> > >I think the latter are already tested by they developpers
> > >when the first seems already in a very early stage.
> > >
> > >I'm disquieted by the "most annoying bugs" list and the _may
> > >be_ delayed Alpha 3.
> > >
> > >I personnally think that a stable distribution is better
> >
> > .than the very most up to date one.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was also very concerned when I saw the 'most annoying bugs' list
> > today (as I epxected Alpha 3).
>
> We have Alpha3. Bugs are expected ;)

Perhaps replacing Alpha with Devel would convey the right message to people,
that these releases are development releases that are not feature-complete or
in feature-freeze.  After feature-freeze they could be called Alpha, Beta...

It would avoid unnecessary discussion and panicking..  not everyone reads the
milestone plan like they ought to :-)

[Adrian Schröter]

Am Thursday 10 August 2006 15:12 schrieb Silviu Marin-Caea:

> On Thursday 10 August 2006 15:27, Marcus Meissner wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 02:29:36PM +0200, Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
> > > >>> [hidden email] 10-08-2006 14:45 >>>
> > > >
> > > >In order not to do again the mistakes made with the zen
> > > >update and 10.1, I think we should have _two_ feature freeze
> > > >dates...
> > > >
> > > >One for the _new things_ (patterns, Xorg 7...) and one for
> > > >the _new releases_ of already used things (Kde, Gnome)
> > > >
> > > >I think the latter are already tested by they developpers
> > > >when the first seems already in a very early stage.
> > > >
> > > >I'm disquieted by the "most annoying bugs" list and the _may
> > > >be_ delayed Alpha 3.
> > > >
> > > >I personnally think that a stable distribution is better
> > >
> > > .than the very most up to date one.
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was also very concerned when I saw the 'most annoying bugs' list
> > > today (as I epxected Alpha 3).
> >
> > We have Alpha3. Bugs are expected ;)
>
> Perhaps replacing Alpha with Devel would convey the right message to
> people, that these releases are development releases that are not
> feature-complete or in feature-freeze.  After feature-freeze they could be
> called Alpha, Beta...
>
> It would avoid unnecessary discussion and panicking..  not everyone reads
> the milestone plan like they ought to :-)

What is the difference between Alpha and Devel for you ?

Alphas are no feature complete and not feature frozen in mind.

--

Adrian Schroeter
SUSE Linux Products GmbH,  Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
email: [hidden email]

[Marcus Meissner]

On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:12:30PM +0300, Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:

> On Thursday 10 August 2006 15:27, Marcus Meissner wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 02:29:36PM +0200, Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
> > > >>> [hidden email] 10-08-2006 14:45 >>>
> > > >
> > > >In order not to do again the mistakes made with the zen
> > > >update and 10.1, I think we should have _two_ feature freeze
> > > >dates...
> > > >
> > > >One for the _new things_ (patterns, Xorg 7...) and one for
> > > >the _new releases_ of already used things (Kde, Gnome)
> > > >
> > > >I think the latter are already tested by they developpers
> > > >when the first seems already in a very early stage.
> > > >
> > > >I'm disquieted by the "most annoying bugs" list and the _may
> > > >be_ delayed Alpha 3.
> > > >
> > > >I personnally think that a stable distribution is better
> > >
> > > .than the very most up to date one.
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was also very concerned when I saw the 'most annoying bugs' list
> > > today (as I epxected Alpha 3).
> >
> > We have Alpha3. Bugs are expected ;)
>
> Perhaps replacing Alpha with Devel would convey the right message to people,
> that these releases are development releases that are not feature-complete or
> in feature-freeze.  After feature-freeze they could be called Alpha, Beta...
>
> It would avoid unnecessary discussion and panicking..  not everyone reads the
> milestone plan like they ought to :-)

Lets just call it "Factory".

Ciao, Marcus

[houghi]

On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 01:45:12PM +0200, jdd wrote:
> an other solution should be to use a debian like calendar (I
> speak of the three distros, stable, unstable and testing,
> not of the delay between releases :-)

That does already exist. Sort of. Stable is 10.1. Testing is Factory and
unstable is adding extra repositories and install stuff from non-suse
places.

As least that is how I see it.
--
houghi Please to not toppost http://houghi.org
                                                  My experience with SUSE
You can have my keyboard ...
                      if you can pry it from my dead, cold, stiff fingers

[Tobias Burnus]

Hi,

houghi wrote:
> That does already exist. Sort of. Stable is 10.1. Testing is Factory and
> unstable is adding extra repositories and install stuff from non-suse
> places.
>
> As least that is how I see it.
>  
Well, sometimes the dependencies are broken in Factory. Therefore I
would label Factory as "Unstable" and the alpha releases as "Testing".

Actually, I really dislike how long it sometimes takes until the
dependencies are corrected. For instance gcc-fortran was split into
libgfortran.rpm and gcc-fortran.rpm. It took about three weeks until
also the libgfortran.rpm was part of Factory. (I think also the current
Factory tree has packages-dependency problems, at least I miss two
xorg-x11-lib*rpm packages: libXft.so.1 and libXaw.so.8. The xorg*rpm are
all dated  6 to 8 Aug.)

Tobias

[Stefan Dirsch]

On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 03:36:12PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> also the libgfortran.rpm was part of Factory. (I think also the current
> Factory tree has packages-dependency problems, at least I miss two
> xorg-x11-lib*rpm packages: libXft.so.1 and libXaw.so.8. The xorg*rpm are
> all dated  6 to 8 Aug.)

Both libs are in xorg-x11-libs.

Stefan

Public Key available
------------------------------------------------------
Stefan Dirsch (Res. & Dev.)   SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
Tel: [phone]            Maxfeldstraße 5
FAX: [phone]          D-90409 Nürnberg
http://www.suse.de            Germany
------------------------------------------------------

[vetter]

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Tobias Burnus wrote:

> Hi,
>
> houghi wrote:
> > That does already exist. Sort of. Stable is 10.1. Testing is Factory and
> > unstable is adding extra repositories and install stuff from non-suse
> > places.
> >
> > As least that is how I see it.
> >  
> Well, sometimes the dependencies are broken in Factory. Therefore I
> would label Factory as "Unstable" and the alpha releases as "Testing".
>
> Actually, I really dislike how long it sometimes takes until the
> dependencies are corrected. For instance gcc-fortran was split into
> libgfortran.rpm and gcc-fortran.rpm. It took about three weeks until
> also the libgfortran.rpm was part of Factory. (I think also the current
> Factory tree has packages-dependency problems, at least I miss two
> xorg-x11-lib*rpm packages: libXft.so.1 and libXaw.so.8. The xorg*rpm are
> all dated  6 to 8 Aug.)

Did you file bug reports?

--
Andreas Vetter Tel: [phone]
Fakultaet fuer Physik und Astronomie Fax: [phone]
Universitaet Wuerzburg

[Tobias Burnus]

Hi,

Stefan Dirsch schrieb:
> Both libs are in xorg-x11-libs.
>  
Ok, I was mislead by:

# rpm -Uvh xorg-x11-*
error: Failed dependencies:
        libXft.so.1 is needed by (installed) intel-iidb91036-9.1.036-1.i386
        libXaw.so.8()(64bit) is needed by (installed) xterm-215-2.x86_64

The problem is not that libXft and libXaw are missing, but that only
libXft.so.2 is provided and not libXft.so.1 anymore.
-> bug 198432

Tobias

[Tobias Burnus]

Hi,

Stefan Dirsch wrote:
>> # rpm -Uvh xorg-x11-*
>> error: Failed dependencies:
>>         libXft.so.1 is needed by (installed) intel-iidb91036-9.1.036-1.i386
>>         libXaw.so.8()(64bit) is needed by (installed) xterm-215-2.x86_64
> Ok. But I can't understand the Xaw issue:
>   libXaw.so.8()(64bit) is needed by (installed) xterm-215-2.x86_64
> # rpm --provides -q xorg-x11-libs|grep Xaw
> libXaw.so.8
>  
I don't understand this either. Looking at PROVIDES in mc, one sees that
exactly that library, "libXaw.so.8()(64bit)" , is provieded by
xorg-x11-libs-7.1-9.x86_64.rpm. But still I get, as said:

# rpm -Uvh xorg-x11-libs-7.1-9.x86_64.rpm
xorg-x11-libs-32bit-7.1-9.x86_64.rpm
xorg-x11-{7,d,f,p,x,u,lib[A-Za-rx]}*                    
error: Failed dependencies:
        libXaw.so.8()(64bit) is needed by (installed)
tightvnc-1.2.9-201.x86_64
        libXaw.so.8()(64bit) is needed by (installed)
v4l-conf-3.94-22.x86_64
        libXaw.so.8()(64bit) is needed by (installed) t1lib-1.3.1-586.x86_64
        libXaw.so.8()(64bit) is needed by (installed) xterm-215-2.x86_64
        libXaw.so.8()(64bit) is needed by (installed)
i4l-base-2006.7.3-2.x86_64

(This time with intel-iidb91036-9.1.036-1.i386 deinstalled to make sure
it does not interfer.)

I have frankly no idea. This is with rpm-4.4.2-44.

Tobias

Tobias Burnus a écrit :

> Well, sometimes the dependencies are broken in Factory. Therefore I
> would label Factory as "Unstable" and the alpha releases as "Testing".

For them who are not familiar with debian names,
http://www.debian.org/releases/

stable is debian 3.1 Sarge. Debian become "3" 3 or 4 years
ago :-), it's used mainly for servers, I don't know many
users keeping it on a desktop. it could be seen as our 10.0
(or may be the comercial Novell version, with it's 5 years
support sheme)

Testing is "Etch". Testing cicle is very long, around two
years, sometimes more. It's like our 10.1 (the zen updater
problem is absolutely excluded from stable but not from
testing). It's probably the most used one, not promoted as
stable as long as bugs are seen.

unstable is what the title say, safe for the name wich is
always the same, that is "Sid". It can be seen as our
"Factory". One must have a good heart to use unstable :-)

I think this sheme is very nice. Of course it's perfectly
fitted for the Debian all voluntary support system, but it
has also the advantage to stop grinning about "bugs". It's
normal to have bugs on testing

I think we could keep the "stable" version on 10.0 as long
as it's supported or at least one year after the 10.1 release.

this shifting sheme set much less stress on the debuggers
and in fact, there are probably too many SUSE versions
around here.

jdd


--
http://www.dodin.net
http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html
http://lucien.dodin.net
http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos

[Andreas Jaeger]

jdd <[hidden email]> writes:

> In order not to do again the mistakes made with the zen update and
> 10.1, I think we should have _two_ feature freeze dates...
>
>
> One for the _new things_ (patterns, Xorg 7...) and one for the _new
> releases_ of already used things (Kde, Gnome)

We had basically so far:

* A toolchain freeze some weeks before beta1: Minor updates that do
  not break stuff are allowed but no more major updates for gcc,
  binutils, etc.

* The big freeze with beta1 for everything.

> I think the latter are already tested by they developpers when the
> first seems already in a very early stage.

My plan is more to integrate risky stuff as early as possible,
e.g. patterns now and X11R7 now ;-)

> I'm disquieted by the "most annoying bugs" list and the _may be_
> delayed Alpha 3.

We'll release tomorrow.  I really want to give you a distribution that
you can install without hand-editing the grub files and where you
cannot make any changes to the patterns ;-)

> I personnally think that a stable distribution is better than the very
> most up to date one.
>
> an other solution should be to use a debian like calendar (I speak of
> the three distros, stable, unstable and testing, not of the delay
> between releases :-)
>
> jdd

Andreas
--
 Andreas Jaeger, [hidden email], http://www.suse.de/~aj/
  SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

[Andreas Jaeger]

"Dominique Leuenberger" <[hidden email]> writes:

> I was also very concerned when I saw the 'most annoying bugs' list
> today (as I epxected Alpha 3).
> The worst that can happen to openSUSE is having (again) a release with
> bugs like the updater in 10.1. Even though they are fixed now, it's
> still around and poeple installing without an internet connection most
> obviosuly run into it.

For me Alphas have a lower quality than Betas have and I they might be
broken sometimes in ways that would never be acceptable for a final
release.
 
> If the schedule for 10.2 should be kept like this (which I think it
> should) then we should try to put bugs away instead of adding
> last-minute-features and packages. Some might be solved with new
> packages, some might not.

The X11 change was planned for a long time but it was indeed a bit
tight at the end.

Btw. in general my plan is:

* Release AlphaN
* Break everything;-) (I mean: put new stuff in that could be broken)
* Stabilize again in time for our AlphaNplus (after two weeks)
* Stabilize furthr for the next public Alpha

Andreas
--
 Andreas Jaeger, [hidden email], http://www.suse.de/~aj/
  SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

Andreas Jaeger a écrit :

> My plan is more to integrate risky stuff as early as possible,
> e.g. patterns now and X11R7 now ;-)

I would say X11R7 yes (we are not the only ones to test it),
but Pattern... we are not even sure of what they are :-() -
so be extremely carefull. May make them optional for 10.2
and keep the good old system we use for years :-)

> We'll release tomorrow.  I really want to give you a distribution that
> you can install without hand-editing the grub files and where you
> cannot make any changes to the patterns ;-)
>

honestly, for Factory I don't care :-)

just how many time was them between zen updater inclusion
and 10.1 release? and what is the final release fixed for
10.2? if we want it before the end of the year, we have 4
month. it's fairly short.

some enhancements are expected by many (I think of Kde or
Gnome versions) so we are nearly obliged to give some.
others are brand new and are not that urgent (btw I don't
know what the others distributions do)

may be we should have somewhere a discussion of the far
future of openSUSE (not 10.2 but 11 or 12), some sort of
brainstorming to make the next century Linux :-)

jdd


--
http://www.dodin.net
http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html
http://lucien.dodin.net
http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos

[Andreas Jaeger]

jdd <[hidden email]> writes:

> Andreas Jaeger a écrit :
>
>> My plan is more to integrate risky stuff as early as possible,
>> e.g. patterns now and X11R7 now ;-)
>
> I would say X11R7 yes (we are not the only ones to test it), but
> Pattern... we are not even sure of what they are :-() -
> so be extremely carefull. May make them optional for 10.2 and keep the
> good old system we use for years :-)

That's not possible with patterns ;-(.

Download Alpha3 CD1 and boot from it - no need to install.  You can
then look at what we have right now and continue discussing.

>> We'll release tomorrow.  I really want to give you a distribution that
>> you can install without hand-editing the grub files and where you
>> cannot make any changes to the patterns ;-)
>>
>
> honestly, for Factory I don't care :-)
>
> just how many time was them between zen updater inclusion and 10.1
> release? and what is the final release fixed for 10.2? if we want it
> before the end of the year, we have 4 month. it's fairly short.
>
> some enhancements are expected by many (I think of Kde or Gnome
> versions) so we are nearly obliged to give some. others are brand new
> and are not that urgent (btw I don't know what the others
> distributions do)

KDE 3.5.4 (already in) and GNOME 2.16 (started), yes.

> may be we should have somewhere a discussion of the far future of
> openSUSE (not 10.2 but 11 or 12), some sort of brainstorming to make
> the next century Linux :-)

Yes, good idea...

Andreas
--
 Andreas Jaeger, [hidden email], http://www.suse.de/~aj/
  SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

[Rajko M.]

Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:

> On Thursday 10 August 2006 15:27, Marcus Meissner wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 02:29:36PM +0200, Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
>>>>>> [hidden email] 10-08-2006 14:45 >>>
>>>> In order not to do again the mistakes made with the zen
>>>> update and 10.1, I think we should have _two_ feature freeze
>>>> dates...
>>>>
>>>> One for the _new things_ (patterns, Xorg 7...) and one for
>>>> the _new releases_ of already used things (Kde, Gnome)
>>>>
>>>> I think the latter are already tested by they developpers
>>>> when the first seems already in a very early stage.
>>>>
>>>> I'm disquieted by the "most annoying bugs" list and the _may
>>>> be_ delayed Alpha 3.
>>>>
>>>> I personnally think that a stable distribution is better
>>> .than the very most up to date one.
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I was also very concerned when I saw the 'most annoying bugs' list
>>> today (as I epxected Alpha 3).
>> We have Alpha3. Bugs are expected ;)
>
> Perhaps replacing Alpha with Devel would convey the right message to people,
> that these releases are development releases that are not feature-complete or
> in feature-freeze.  After feature-freeze they could be called Alpha, Beta...
>
> It would avoid unnecessary discussion and panicking..  not everyone reads the
> milestone plan like they ought to :-)

Replacing standard mark for development stage Alpha, Beta and RC, with
more general "development" will produce panic in more people that will
be disoriented in what stage is the project.

Only thing that we can do is to point out the definition,
that tells:
"Alpha is first stage in development,
Beta is second,
RC, alias Release Candidate, third and last, before
Gold Master which is final released version."

And of course point to Project Milestones panel on the very Front page.

--
Regards,
Rajko.
Visit http://en.opensuse.org/MiniSUSE