3 ms·

I guess the QA infrastructure isn't up to the task for rolling OS releases. But it would make a lot of sense to separate the release cycles of the actual OS and

by bergie 16y ago

I guess the QA infrastructure isn't up to the task for rolling OS releases. But it would make a lot of sense to separate the release cycles of the actual OS and applications it supplies. With Maemo this has worked pretty well: http://bergie.iki.fi/blog/application_quality_assurance_in_linux_distributions/ http://bergie.iki.fi/blog/application_quality_assurance_in_l... (hmm, something wrong with the server. Here's the Google Cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://bergie.iki.fi/blog/application_quality_assurance_in_linux_distributions/ http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...)

viraptor 16y ago
> With Maemo this has worked pretty well Seriously? Have you seen the comments on maemo's bugzilla saying "it's marked as fixed, when is it going to be released" -> "we don't publish the release dates beforehand" -> "but it still doesn't work for me, it's not fixed"... etc. No, I do not believe it works well. The main / extras split is unavoidable for any new smartphone with apps repository. Maemo has a lot of problems because of not doing more frequent rolling updates - I'd actually blame not being able to type a small letter at the beginning of a sentence, for ~half a year as a result of crap release cycle.
- bergie 16y ago
  The issues you mention mostly deal with the platform itself, and that has obviously been affected by the switch of focus from Maemo to MeeGo. Agreed that the platform could benefit from rolling releases as well, but at least the current approach allows that for applications. Something that most Linux distributions don't do.