<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<link href="chrome://translator/skin/floatingPanel.css"
type="text/css" rel="stylesheet">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 15/09/2012 2:44 PM, Kent James
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:50540EAB.2000605@caspia.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/14/2012 9:30 PM,
Unicorn.Consulting wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:50540461.5030406@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<link href="chrome://translator/skin/floatingPanel.css"
type="text/css" rel="stylesheet">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 15/09/2012 1:42 PM, Kent James
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:50540047.4040003@caspia.com" type="cite">I
have an alternate proposal for the release planning. <br>
<br>
So my proposal is that we do "intermediate releases" to the
main release channel starting at either TB 22 or TB 23. These
would be releases from the main central/aurora/beta/release
repositories so would not need additional repos with all of
the complications of that. <br>
<br>
</blockquote>
I think that an ESR release should not become an ESR release at
the same time the general release occurs. ESR is really aimed at
Business and they are in no hurry for new releases, so we do
what business has been doing for almost as long as they have had
computers, wait for the .1 release. That is there will be a
17.1 ESR and a 24.1 ESR or whatever no time frame as such, but
released reasonably soon after the main release with fixes as
required, including a roleup of the now almost mandatory 0.1 and
0.2. Releases. The general user base can come along for the
ride to point one, but point one is the ESR release.<br>
<br>
Matt<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
OK I like that - and it could be done for the 17 series as well.<br>
<br>
So to interpret what I think you are saying in terms of repos and
channels, we proceed with 17.0 as planned - but it is not the ESR
release. We freeze mozilla-central in comm-aurora, release, and
beta so that eventually release, beta, and aurora are all on
gecko17. New work is landed in comm-central (with current gecko),
and selected patches are landed in aurora (with a+) as needed in
17.1 (which will also be ESR). After 17.1 releases, we restart the
central->aurora->beta migrations as now (but no new releases
until 24.0 then 24.1 ESR)<br>
<br>
So we do the allowed 1 intermediate release, but we do it
immediately so that hopefully central and aurora are close enough
together that the backport is easy.<br>
<br>
If that is your proposal, I like it!<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Your interpretation is it I never really got the channels but it
sounds exactly what I was trying to say. The only one that roles
along undaunted is nightly and the point 1 release never contains
new features, only bug fixes (although they are one and the same
sometimes) I think also that it lives up to the intent better.
ESR is really aimed at those wanting tried and tested products, to
deliver on that expectation we should not be offering new features
to them at the time of release.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:50540EAB.2000605@caspia.com" type="cite">
:rkent<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
tb-planning mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tb-planning@mozilla.org">tb-planning@mozilla.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning">https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Benjamin Franklin</pre>
<div style="bottom: auto; left: 1459px; right: auto; top: 514px;"
class="translator-theme-default" id="translator-floating-panel"> </div>
</body>
</html>