Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Blue Lizard <webmaster@×××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@××××××××××.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] What should be in place before 1.0 release
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 14:37:00
Message-Id: 3BC9F783.6000300@dofty.zzn.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] What should be in place before 1.0 release by Karl Trygve Kalleberg
1 Karl Trygve Kalleberg wrote:
2 > Hi gang.
3 >
4 > I just like to voice my opinion about issues that should be addressed
5 > before the release of Gentoo Linux 1.0 (hurrah!)
6 >
7 > While I can to a large degree accept that the distro itself is technically
8 > ready enough to be released, our development team is in no way prepared to
9 > handle the influx of new users.
10 >
11 > At minimum, we should have the following points fixed:
12 > 1) A proper bug-reporting system. We simply won't be able to keep track of
13 > the issues cropping up in gentoo-{dev,users,ebuild,whatever} given the
14 > current developer situation.
15
16 bugzilla _could_ handle this, but while it is technically ready enough
17 our development team is in no way prepared to handle the influx of new
18 users that would find it a pain in the neck to use.
19
20 > 2) A flawless installation guide. This means that we should do the
21 > installation of the 1.0 version in a handful of different configurations
22 > and make certain the installation guide is not only correct, but succinct
23 > and unambiguous. This is tricky, but every hour we spend fixing it before
24 > final release, will save us tenfold down the line.
25
26 Personally, I was surprised at the quality of the 1.0_rc6 install from
27 source guide. Could be some improvements, but it is a nice place to
28 start from.
29
30 > 3) Verify that all our ebuilds actually work as advertised. Some ebuilds
31 > seem to be more error-prone than others (minicom, koffice). The ones that
32 > have any problems whatsoever should be masked out until we know that they
33 > really work.
34
35 A good way for ebuild to handle apps that dont flag/opt well would be
36 nice, other than hard coding everything :) Like if a build is known to
37 spark out when a given portion is compiled -O3, knock it down to -O2
38 (IOW ebuild parses out flags in make.conf and handles wisely, according
39 to the writers instructions.)
40
41 > 4) In a related note, we should have a
42 > "grace-period"/"codeslush"/"codefreeze" of at least one week where we do
43 > not add new stuff, and do nothing but bug-squashing. We should verify that
44 > *all* ebuilds have been tested, preferrably with *all* their optional USE
45 > arguments.
46
47 You are out of your mind. One week? DUDE! This is a 1.0 release of
48 what could be a major mainstream linux distribution. One week?
49
50 > 5) We should have a release plan on the web, a task-list if you will,
51 > where we check off items as we progress along to 1.0. This will hopefully
52 > work as a great motivator once we're over half-way ;)
53
54 Yes, and the idea is that up until the very minute that feature freeze
55 goes into effect, anything and everything goes on that list. Someone
56 gets the slightest little notion of something that'd be cool and POOF!,
57 on the list. Just that stuff more whimish than others would be in a
58 diff priority class for obvious reasons.
59
60 > 6) We should officially nominate a Release Manager (I guess this will be
61 > drobbins, but it would be nice for everybody, including non-developers, ie
62 > hardcore Gentoo testers to know who's neck is on the block ;).
63
64 > 7) Perhaps we even should have a release team that acted as drobbins'
65 > elven helpers and make certain that all the items on the task-list are
66 > addressed in a timely fashion. Perhaps all the developers should just act
67 > as elven helpers..
68
69 Who is in charge of evangelism and propoganda right now?
70
71 >
72 > Hope this sets thoughts churning. If we want 1.0 to be stable and good, we
73 > will have to put a lot of effort into it, and do so in a structured
74 > fashion. The all-nighter "throw code at it until it works" is NOT an
75 > option.
76 >
77
78 It's not? awwwwwwwww. ;P

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] What should be in place before 1.0 release Karl Trygve Kalleberg <karltk@×××××××.no>