Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Jun 2008 11:34 UTC, submitted by matej
GNU, GPL, Open Source The open source world is currently debating the merits - if any - of synchronising the release schedules of several of the bigger, key projects that make up a Linux distribution. The discussion was started by Canonical's Mark Shuttleworth, and continued as a back and forth between the Ubuntu leader and KDE's Aaron Seigo, but of course other members of the community discussed right along on blogs and other venues. Sander, developer of Coccinella (an open-source Jabber client) provides some insights into the whole discussion.
Permalink for comment 320805
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: A really bad idea
by dagw on Tue 1st Jul 2008 11:48 UTC in reply to "A really bad idea"
dagw
Member since:
2005-07-06

Suppose one project is unquestionably ready on the date, and the other project is not, for example of the issues Fedora 9 has with KDE 4. Should Fedora have delayed however long it took for KDE 4.1 to be ready? or should KDE 4.1 have been "given" more resources by Mr. Shuttleworth (or someone at the Fedora project) in order to meet Fedora's deadline? What would serious coordination mean in this world?


KDE, in this case, should say, with plenty of warning, that they won't make the deadline and Fedora should then plan to make their next release without the latest KDE version.

Let's say that software projects chooses the 1st week of April and 1st week of October as their release dates and distors 3rd week of April and October (distros projects wouldn't need to release every 6 month of course and could skip a date if they felt the need) . Then all the distros would know by March and September what software they would be including. And they would also know that they will have at least two weeks for testing and integrating the final version of each project before release.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 3