[K12OSN] Release cycle too fast

[Eric Harrison]

I've made several posts on this general topic over the last 1.5 years. I
would look up the links in the archives, but I'm about to slip out for a
much over-due three day weekend.

The points made below pretty much sum up my feelings. We need to keep
the stable versions around (if K12LTSP 3.1.2 does what you need it to
do, then use it!) but we also know that we need to push hard to make
this technology go as far as we want it to go. The release cycle is fast
because it needs to be fast.

 From a personal perspective, I am happy with the development of
K12LTSP.  I believe we are heading the right direction and are placing
our limited resources where they will make the greatest long-term benefit.

-Eric

Jim McQuillan wrote:
>
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Jim Kronebusch wrote:
>
>
>>>I have read it. But my point is that if we didn't have a 4.2
>>>release we could put our efforts into Muekow instead.  How
>>>many of us actually NEED 4.2 over 4.1? Please understand I
>>>think Eric is doing a SUPER job. But being a teacher +
>>>sysadmin + father + husband I know how precious time can be.
>>>So I feel for people like Eric who spend so much time
>>>releasing so often.
>>
>>The new features and fixes are also important to a lot of others in the
>>meantime though.  I for one am very happy to see the PPC support
>>included in the new release.
>
>
> This one is very exciting to me too, and I don't even own a Mac :)
>
>
>>I think the development for Muekow is farther upstream than Eric anyhow
>>(I may be out of line saying that, so correct me if I am wrong).  I
>>think the LTSP folks have to develop the new version along with Ubuntu
>>first, then Eric can take the new setup and repackage it when finished.
>>So in the meantime instead of letting everything just sit as is he is
>>still implementing our requests and repackaging the fixes.
>
>
> Actually, I hope that Eric will be an integral part of the development
> of MueKow.  He's got some valuable insight that we need, in order to
> push the technology forward.  I've got other people that have so far not
> been a part of the LTSP development process that will be joining up
> with us, to achieve our goals.
>
>
>
>>Maybe his time would be more efficient if put toward the development of
>>Muekow, but maybe Muekow won't even evolve.  Maybe it does become
>>existant but takes 2 years before it is ready.  In those cases life
>>still needs to go on in the K12LTSP world.
>>
>>And I would feel bad for anyone who abandoned a current project to work
>>on a possible new project...that may or may not fail...and then have to
>>play catch up for a couple of years lost time.  Not to mention the user
>>base that could be lost in the event things went this way.
>
>
> EXACTLY !
>
> I'll keep putting out updates to LTSP-4.1 as well.  And I can't even say
> that MueKow will completely replace what we currently think of as LTSP.
> At this point, it's just an experiment.
>
>
>
>>I hear your concerns, but I think this is why things haven't gone the
>>way you suggest.  Of course I may be in left field.  Eric would most
>>likely speak for himself better than me.
>>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Jim McQuillan
> jam at Ltsp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 251 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/k12osn/attachments/20050331/48fa5735/attachment.sig>