Let's have a great 23.05 šŸ¦¦ release cycle!

We thought about this carefully in RFC 80. We chose these months because they have a good relation to GNOME and Plasma release schedules.

I donā€™t understand why what Iā€™m saying is so unclear.

There is a mismatch between when the release is available and the name of the release.
I propose to either release a month earlier or rename the release to *.06
Is that such a weird suggestion?

This did confuse me too, at first, but well, 31st of May is still in May. Ubuntu has also had releases quite late in May April/October before, so this naming scheme isnā€™t unusual among distros.

1 Like

Ideally, the release date would allow for a few days to a week to pass for all of the machinery to have time to process the release. Often times itā€™s waiting for hydra, updating the homepage, and a few other tasks to push the release over the expected release date.

One simple solution would be to target the third week, and allow more time for trickle of activities which need to be done.

According to the release schedule, it only slipped a day. Which I think is pretty excellent given the amount of ecosystem levers you need to pull.

When I was release manager, I generally targeted the last weekend (when most volunteers are available), and then expected the machinery (hydra, nixos-homepage) to get remedied some time in the following days. Certain things always come up, and one canā€™t do too much except roll with the punches.

Also, I think when branch-off occurred is almost more important than the day the release was ā€œgenerally availableā€; as the branch-off determines the bulk of package freshness.

Hats off to the release managers :slight_smile: @RaitoBezarius @hexa

15 Likes