Advertisement
Front, Kernel, Security, Distributions, Development. See your byline here on LWN.net.
Weekly Edition
Return to the Distributions page
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H)
While the headline overstates the commitment to a northern hemisphere summer release of Debian "Squeeze" (6.0), there is an interesting tidbit in The H's brief article: "Due to the postponement of the final release until the summer, the code freeze has now also been rescheduled for March 2010. This thwarts Mark Shuttleworth's efforts to synchronise the release cycles of Debian and the Debian-based Ubuntu distribution, at least for Squeeze — the release of the next version 10.04 of Ubuntu is planned for April 2010."
(Log in to post comments)
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Nov 30, 2009 18:55 UTC (Mon) by Ed_L. (guest, #24287) [Link] Just as clarification, as I understand it and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, Shuttleworth's suggestion was for Debian Stable and Ubuntu LTS to synchronize on the same kernel version (RHEL, SUSE, and Mandriva too, if possible), not necessarily on the same release month.
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Nov 30, 2009 19:36 UTC (Mon) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955) [Link]
My understanding is that Canonical's policy for Ubuntu 'lucid' is to synchronise with Debian 'squeeze' for most upstream versions (and packaging, so far as possible), not just the kernel.
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Nov 30, 2009 19:42 UTC (Mon) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]
And since Debian's kernel versions tend to be quite old at the time of GA, the danger here
would be in the Debian kernel being *earlier* than the Ubuntu LTS one.
Seriously, that's the most common reason for Debian failing to install when I go to test it. It's
No sane distro release team would ever consider actually trying to synchronize releases with
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Nov 30, 2009 20:36 UTC (Mon) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Yeah.. If Debian had the ability to release versions in a timely manner then
there would of been no need for Ubuntu in the first place.
Since most people in the Debian community don't seem to be bothered by the
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Nov 30, 2009 20:56 UTC (Mon) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]
"""
Since most people in the Debian community don't seem to be bothered by the preference of feature-based over time-based releases then it should not surprise anybody that Debian is remaining difficult for 3rd parties to work with. """
The Debian community is an entire world unto itself. Nothing really exists outside of it. Or if
If I may be allowed to shamelessly paraphrase from Wikipedia:
Imagine the Debian release team in a cave. Behind the them is an enormous fire, and
Is it not reasonable that the would take the shadows to be real things and the echoes to be
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Nov 30, 2009 21:13 UTC (Mon) by gravious (guest, #7662) [Link]
Way to update Plato's Allegory of the Cave for the Common Linux Era.
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 2, 2009 21:18 UTC (Wed) by mikov (subscriber, #33179) [Link]
Can you explain to me how time based released are supposed to work? How can anyone guarantee that all important bugs have been fixed by a certain date? This is absurd.
I have no doubt that a major reason for Ubuntu's low quality lies in their time-based release schedule. What is worse, 6 months is a complete joke for a serious software release, let alone a whole OS distribution.
I am extremely happy that Debian doesn't have time-based releases, and that it has a long release period. I sincerely hope it never copies the worse of Ubuntu's mistakes.
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 3, 2009 13:32 UTC (Thu) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] Can you explain to me how time based released are supposed to work? How can anyone guarantee that all important bugs have been fixed by a certain date? This is absurd. Indeed. Although a commitment to releasing something in a certain timeframe can be beneficial when determining priorities, a slavish adherence to time-based releases ("We must make a new release on exactly this date or our partners/customers/users will be so disappointed/angry!") typically involves rushed implementation, skipped quality assurance and unhappy partners/customers/users. It's the curse of software developers in many an environment where some manager has expressed the intention to copy such fashionable tendencies in order to re-assert some perceived but inconsequential notion of relevance.
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 3, 2009 17:42 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
how you do time based releases is that if a new version of a package is not ready when the release data rolls around, you revert to an older version.
trying to hold a release until there are no known bugs means that you will release software that is so old that nobody will use it.
even debian stable (one of the most conservative releases around) doesn't kjust wait for there to be no bugs left, they get to a point where they remove or revert packages that have release critical bugs in them, and accept the fact that some packages will have non release-critial bugs in them.
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 3, 2009 17:59 UTC (Thu) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link]
I can't speak for Canonical, but the usual way to make time-based releases
work is to drop features if they can't be done in time, and revert to known- stable versions of things if bugs in later versions become a problem.
Professional software developers *always* have time constraints, and many
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 4, 2009 10:55 UTC (Fri) by jcm (subscriber, #18262) [Link]
Oh, don't forget to mention: Cadence, cadence cadence! :P
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Nov 30, 2009 23:23 UTC (Mon) by Alterego (subscriber, #55989) [Link]
If Canonical wants to synchronize with Debian, they can.
They just need to pay some more engineers to work on it, and release an LTS lets say 3 monthes after a Debian stable release, with the exact same base server stuff. This would be rock solid ubuntu.
So far i prefer the debian way to release when things are in good shape, instead of crazy new bogus stuff in Ubuntu (upstart not waiting for fsck bug resurfacing in karmic ...)
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 1, 2009 21:29 UTC (Tue) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]
"""
If Canonical wants to synchronize with Debian, they can. They just need to pay some more engineers to work on it, """
Didn't he offer just that? And I guess they rejected it. The Debian community craves drama
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 1, 2009 21:56 UTC (Tue) by foom (subscriber, #14868) [Link]
> Didn't he offer just that? And I guess they rejected it. The Debian community craves drama
> more than help, don't you think? There are already far too many cooks in the Debian kitchen.
It seems to me that the referenced article has made it seem as if there's Drama where there actually
Debian is a collection of individuals. As such, if bunch of individuals employed by Canonical wanted
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 4, 2009 10:57 UTC (Fri) by jcm (subscriber, #18262) [Link]
Absolutely. In my personal opinion, distributions have gone nuts with time based releases in recent years to the detriment of longer term progress. It would be far better if we said there will be one release per year roughly and when it's ready, than the way things are done now. But that's just my opinion.
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 1, 2009 2:00 UTC (Tue) by samuel679 (guest, #58355) [Link]
It's funny that whoever posted this never thought of referring to the source - the original article which I wrote.
Steve McIntyre only said that the project was looking at a freeze in March. He indulged in some wishful thinking about a summer release.
But then why would LWN bother about going to the source and getting its facts right? Silly me.
Sam Varghese
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 3, 2009 5:13 UTC (Thu) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955) [Link]
Your hypocrisy is stunning.
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 3, 2009 15:41 UTC (Thu) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646) [Link]
??? The LWN text starts with "the headline overstates the commitment", and thus makes it clear -- if one knows the style of our editors -- that this is a wish.
Would have wanted to have your own article referenced here, don't ya? Too bad that the H writing brought the relevant Ubuntu issue more to the point, for a citation it was more succinct. Oh yes, and maybe get an LWN subscription some time.
Report said Ubuntu LTS would take "Testing" as input instead of "Unstable" Posted Dec 1, 2009 8:41 UTC (Tue) by roblucid (subscriber, #48964) [Link]
Gist of it was, Ubuntu 10.04 needs to be a solid release; what's the point of "time based" release if it's total crap until 2 months later and needs re-mastering?
So if Ubuntu does sync up with Testing, rather than Unstable; then Ubuntu LTS 10.04 can actually release first, yet contain similar packages to Squeeze, even if it's released later.
Presumably Shuttleworth would like to use same kernel as Fedora, SuSE & Mandriva releases to benefit from the other distro's significant kernel teams. Probably Ubuntu is out of sync, with the kernel stable team, perhaps Ubuntu would have sync-ed better with a November LTS release, so everyone can break their new toy over christmas.
Report said Ubuntu LTS would take "Testing" as input instead of "Unstable" Posted Dec 1, 2009 22:43 UTC (Tue) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]
You should listen to Shuttleworth's pitch for distro syncing in the LinuxCon keynote he made. Or go back and read his posts in the Debian list trying to explain his vision of the benefits of syncing.
Shuttleworth's public argument is that multiple distro syncing would benefit upstream project development as it would be a more efficient use of limited manpower. Which is a very interesting argument for the CEO of Canonical to make considering he's not really putting any engineering manpower into the kernel or any of the important plumbing layers like X.
And I've yet to come across an upstream developer of note who works on the kernel or associated plumbing who has spoken out in support of Shuttleworth's metacycle idea from an active upstream developer's perspective. I can't even cite Canonical employee who has backed him up in an upstream project specific mailinglist or other publicly archived medium.
Until upstream project development teams start making it a point to request/demand distributions collectively use specific versions all of this syncing stuff is just a lot of hot air. And I don't see any evidence at all that upstream project development teams are buying into Shuttleworth's vision of a multi-year development metacycle for core components.
-jef
Report said Ubuntu LTS would take "Testing" as input instead of "Unstable" Posted Dec 2, 2009 18:21 UTC (Wed) by branden (subscriber, #7029) [Link]
One might almost say that Mark Shuttleworth's mind "is an entire world
unto itself. Nothing really exists outside of it. Or if it does, it does so in a highly abstract form."
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 2, 2009 23:16 UTC (Wed) by dpotapov (guest, #46495) [Link]
Considering how conservative Debian is, the postpone of code freeze will likely result in more key packages having the same version in Debian and the Ubuntu LTS.
Also, third parties tend to release their software for Ubuntu LTS, thus having slightly newer version of some packages than in the Ubuntu LTS is better for Debian than having them slightly older.
Debian 6.0 Squeeze to be released in summer 2010 (The H) Posted Dec 5, 2009 22:11 UTC (Sat) by cjwatson (subscriber, #7322) [Link]
The plan of record for Ubuntu 10.04 is to attempt to sync *freeze* dates as closely as possible with Debian Squeeze; it would always have been very difficult to sync *release* dates with Debian Squeeze, and any early suggestion there may have been of doing so (I can't honestly remember, and am not going to go back and check at this point) would have been amended pretty quickly during discussions. Since Lucid's feature freeze is scheduled for 18 February (and we have the option of pulling more things in after that), I'd hardly say that we're talking a huge amount of skew here against a prospective Debian freeze in March.
Since the team in Ubuntu tasked with making this work includes two former Debian release managers, we're pretty familiar with what's involved here.
|
|
||||||||||||