[cut-team] CUT discussion summary for -project@

[Anthony Towns]

On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 22:24, Lucas Nussbaum <lucas at lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:
> However, there are several different proposals on what we would actually
> want to do.

While that's true, I don't see what the point of a poll is?

> Proposal A: Users install and use snapshots of testing made every 3-to-6 months
> Proposal B: Users install from snapshot, and then update to and use testing

We can do both of these by providing snapshots, anyway -- why choose?

> Proposal D: A + B -- Users use either snapshots or testing

How would we possibly have snapshots without users having this choice?
The only question is how convenient the choices will be, and that's
not really something that has to be decided before we've got something
workable.

> Proposal C: new suite: "rolling". Users install from snapshot then upgrade to rolling

This implies doing a snapshot too, and as far as I've seen there's as
many different definitions of what "rolling" would actually mean as
people interested in it.

> Proposal E: A + C -- Users use either snapshots or rolling

How would we possibly have snapshots + rolling (as per C), without
users having this choice?

Please don't get me wrong -- a summary's a great idea, and I'm all for
polling and getting wider feedback; I just don't see the value in this
particular question. I would've thought it'd be better to say "there's
two approaches we're considering: making testing snapshots available,
both for direct installation as a regular 3-6 monthly release without
extended support and as a means to more directly and easily install
current testing; and creating a new "rolling" suite that provides some
different tradeoffs compared to testing, such as ...", just so people
know where things are up to.

If all the options we're considering really do involve setting up a
testing-snapshot, we should just get on with that, afaics?

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj at erisian.com.au>