[lsb-discuss] Time-based release for LSB 5.0 (sorta)

Jeff Licquia jeff at licquia.org
Tue Jun 7 09:07:47 PDT 2011


On the call last week, we talked very shortly about the release schedule 
for LSB 5.0.  I proposed something like a time-based release ("work on 
stuff until a certain date, then freeze and release").  There were some 
concerns, but we ran out of time on the call before we could get into 
those concerns.

The main concern, I think, was in understanding what things are 
important, and making sure they get done.  Since we're at a big 
inflection point, it's important to make sure we get the deprecations, 
removals, and additions right; if we end up not having time to do that, 
it's not good to just say "well, too bad, we're out of time; gotta wait 
another few years for the rest".

The implication is that we won't do any kind of project planning for the 
items on the list: prioritization, time estimates, etc.  We still need 
to do those things, in particular for the kinds of tasks we can only do 
at a "dot-zero" release.  Ideally, we would have a "time-based" date 
that takes those estimates into account, just like previous releases.

The difference, I think, is in what we do if we don't get to everything 
on our list.  For releases up to 4.1, that has resulted in schedule 
slips.  This time, it wouldn't.

It might also mean that we pay closer attention to priorities.  If the 
deprecation/removal thing is really important to get right this 
go-round, then deprecation and removal items are on the top of the list. 
  We would need to be disciplined enough to not start on, say, D-Bus 
until the deprecation and removal things are worked out.  That might 
mean D-Bus isn't worked on until later in the project, and might not be 
fully baked on freeze day.  In the past, that would mean the schedule 
slips; now, it would mean that D-Bus gets punted to 5.1, no matter how 
much we want it.

(Just making stuff up re: priorities.  I'm not trying to imply any 
particular preferred priority list.)

If we have significant outside resources, obviously they can work on 
whatever they want on their own priority schedule.  (Hi, ARM folks!) 
The main target of this plan would be the (mostly) full-time LSB folks; 
basically Stew and I.

Thoughts?


More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list