ReleaseCadence

Differences between revisions 27 and 28
Revision 27 as of 2013-03-07 22:25:07
Size: 3187
Comment:
Revision 28 as of 2013-03-07 22:53:40
Size: 3684
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 20: Line 20:
= Proposed rolling release + monthly updated release scheme (Rick Spencer) = = Proposed rolling release + monthly updated release scheme =
Line 30: Line 30:
 * fresher software in the hands of users thanks to monthly releases
 * less releases to deliver SRUs on
 * Fresher software in the hands of users
 * Fewer stable releases to support conserves engineering efforts for current development and LTS point releases
Line 34: Line 34:
 * no 13.04 and 13.10 series with 18 months of support  * Questionable replacement for current LTS (doubts about quality of a rolling release)
 * Difficult for some flavor communities to fulfill their mission without a stable base to ship on
 * Supporting the monthly snapshot requires new engineering efforts

= 6 Month Releases =
Continue to release interim releases but only support them until roughly the next interim release 6 months later.

Details on the ReleaseCadence/SixMonthInterimRelease subpage.

Benefits:
 * Not a radical departure from our current release cadence
 * Fresher software in the hands of users
 * Fewer stabler releases to support conserves engineering efforts for current development and LTS point releases

Drawbacks:
 * Software ages to six months old each release
 * Cost of doing release management each cycle
 * Users must update each month to receive support
Line 38: Line 55:
 * make the update process from point to point really bulletproof? Upgrading today is possible, but to keep the system clean over multiple successive upgrades requires an uncommonly high level of skill with APT.
 * strengthen the definition of point releases in the LTS so that interim releases are obviously less relevant?
 * do a reasonable amount of release management on, say, MONTHLY releases that they are actual releases rather than just snapshots?
 * Make the update process from point to point really bulletproof. Upgrading today is possible, but to keep the system clean over multiple successive upgrades requires an uncommonly high level of skill with APT.
 * Strengthen the definition of point releases in the LTS so that interim releases are obviously less relevant.
 * Do a reasonable amount of release management on, say, MONTHLY releases that they are actual releases rather than just snapshots.
Line 42: Line 59:
Details on the ReleaseCadence/TrueMonthlyReleases subpage.
Line 43: Line 61:
= More frequent releases (multiple proposers) = Benefits:
 * Fresher software in the hands of users
 * Fewer stabler releases to support conserves engineering efforts for current development
Line 45: Line 65:
Speed up / automate further the creation of new Ubuntu releases (series).

This is currently a costly operation in terms of release engineering time, means going through various freezes, updating a bunch of packages and locations and seems out of reach in the short-term.

= More point releases =

Deliver frequent point releases with a more open SRU policy allowing new software versions.

Backport latest desktop bits to latest stable release and update installation media monthly as we do for 12.04.2 etc.

= other proposals to be added here =

(Add your own proposal in a new section here.)
Drawbacks:
 * Cost of doing release management each cycle
 * Users must update each month to receive support

This page captures various proposals for changing the Ubuntu release cadence.

Current release scheme

Currently we have:

  • LTS releases every ~ 2 years (8.04 -- only on the server, 10.04, 12.04); Ubuntu Desktop has 3 years of support for 8.04 and 10.04, with 5 years on 12.04 LTS
  • interim releases every 6 months
  • development release (currently raring) where next interim or LTS release is prepared -- see diagram below

raring today

Issues with current release scheme:

  • releases every 6 months are too far apart when compared with web and mobile standards (updates ~ every month)
  • lots of time spent on security updates and SRUs of many past supported releases
  • insufficient amount of testers of SRUs
  • insufficient quality checks of uploaded packages before they reach developers (raring-proposed to raring migration)

Proposed rolling release + monthly updated release scheme

Rick Spencer proposed on ubuntu-devel@ a new release cadence dropping the interim (non-LTS) releases but adding monthly releases supported only until the next month.

An initial proposed implementation was captured in the foundations-1303-monthly-snapshots blueprint -- see diagram below

Details on the ReleaseCadence/RollingRelease sub page.

Benefits:

  • Fresher software in the hands of users
  • Fewer stable releases to support conserves engineering efforts for current development and LTS point releases

Drawbacks:

  • Questionable replacement for current LTS (doubts about quality of a rolling release)
  • Difficult for some flavor communities to fulfill their mission without a stable base to ship on
  • Supporting the monthly snapshot requires new engineering efforts

6 Month Releases

Continue to release interim releases but only support them until roughly the next interim release 6 months later.

Details on the ReleaseCadence/SixMonthInterimRelease subpage.

Benefits:

  • Not a radical departure from our current release cadence
  • Fresher software in the hands of users
  • Fewer stabler releases to support conserves engineering efforts for current development and LTS point releases

Drawbacks:

  • Software ages to six months old each release
  • Cost of doing release management each cycle
  • Users must update each month to receive support

True Monthly Releases

Can we make even MORE releases in a year? And can we automate that process to make it bulletproof for end-users?

  • Make the update process from point to point really bulletproof. Upgrading today is possible, but to keep the system clean over multiple successive upgrades requires an uncommonly high level of skill with APT.
  • Strengthen the definition of point releases in the LTS so that interim releases are obviously less relevant.
  • Do a reasonable amount of release management on, say, MONTHLY releases that they are actual releases rather than just snapshots.

Details on the ReleaseCadence/TrueMonthlyReleases subpage.

Benefits:

  • Fresher software in the hands of users
  • Fewer stabler releases to support conserves engineering efforts for current development

Drawbacks:

  • Cost of doing release management each cycle
  • Users must update each month to receive support

ReleaseCadence (last edited 2013-03-08 01:06:18 by vorlon)