Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Wikitech

Tentative specs for MW releases

 

 

Wikipedia wikitech RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


mah at everybody

Oct 14, 2012, 6:26 PM

Post #1 of 10 (667 views)
Permalink
Tentative specs for MW releases

I said I would lay out my thoughts regarding MW releases this weekend,
so here goes.

First: I want to provide a regular schedule so users know what to
expect, but something that a volunteer (me, for now) can achieve.

Second: I want to provide something that Linux distributors can
incorporate into their distributions.

To fulfill the first point, I think a release twice a year -- like
Ubuntu releases -- makes a lot of sense. This schedule also works for
Linux distributors like Ubuntu, Fedora, and OpenSuSE

Since I started out using Debian (which has now adopted a 2 year freeze
cycle), I think it also makes sense to provide LTS support. Platonides
and I (but mostly Platonides) have been working with the Debian
developers to get 1.19 into Wheezy which was frozen in June.

With that in mind, here is what I propose:

1.18.0 | Security updates till 1.20
1.19.x | April 2012 (LTS)
1.20.0 | October 2012
1.21.0 | April 2013 (Start in May)
1.22.0 | October 2013 (Start in September)
1.23.0 | April 2014 (LTS)
1.24.0 | October 2014
1.25.0 | April 2015
1.26.0 | October 2015
1.27.0 | April 2016 (LTS)

LTS releases will updates until (at least) the next LTS release. This
means security updates, but other updates that don't require schema
changes if people are interested in providing them. Since a couple of
people have put the 1.20.0 milestone on a handful of bugs, I'm assuming
now that they think those are worth merging to the 1.20 series. I'd
like to get the fixes backported to 1.19 as well, if possible.

Well, that's pretty much it what I was thinking. How does this sound to
you guys?

--
http://hexmode.com/

Any time you have "one overriding idea", and push your idea as a
superior ideology, you're going to be wrong. ... The fact is,
reality is complicated -- Linus Torvalds <http://hexm.de/mc>

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


tylerromeo at gmail

Oct 14, 2012, 6:29 PM

Post #2 of 10 (612 views)
Permalink
Re: Tentative specs for MW releases [In reply to]

I do like the idea of a semiannual release. On a related note, I also think
we should have better plans on what is actually going to be in each
release. In other words, a site administrator should be able to know what
new features are planned for the next release before the actual release has
been made. Maybe this already happens and I just don't know where this
resource is.
*--*
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
Major in Computer Science
www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail



On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody>wrote:

> I said I would lay out my thoughts regarding MW releases this weekend,
> so here goes.
>
> First: I want to provide a regular schedule so users know what to
> expect, but something that a volunteer (me, for now) can achieve.
>
> Second: I want to provide something that Linux distributors can
> incorporate into their distributions.
>
> To fulfill the first point, I think a release twice a year -- like
> Ubuntu releases -- makes a lot of sense. This schedule also works for
> Linux distributors like Ubuntu, Fedora, and OpenSuSE
>
> Since I started out using Debian (which has now adopted a 2 year freeze
> cycle), I think it also makes sense to provide LTS support. Platonides
> and I (but mostly Platonides) have been working with the Debian
> developers to get 1.19 into Wheezy which was frozen in June.
>
> With that in mind, here is what I propose:
>
> 1.18.0 | Security updates till 1.20
> 1.19.x | April 2012 (LTS)
> 1.20.0 | October 2012
> 1.21.0 | April 2013 (Start in May)
> 1.22.0 | October 2013 (Start in September)
> 1.23.0 | April 2014 (LTS)
> 1.24.0 | October 2014
> 1.25.0 | April 2015
> 1.26.0 | October 2015
> 1.27.0 | April 2016 (LTS)
>
> LTS releases will updates until (at least) the next LTS release. This
> means security updates, but other updates that don't require schema
> changes if people are interested in providing them. Since a couple of
> people have put the 1.20.0 milestone on a handful of bugs, I'm assuming
> now that they think those are worth merging to the 1.20 series. I'd
> like to get the fixes backported to 1.19 as well, if possible.
>
> Well, that's pretty much it what I was thinking. How does this sound to
> you guys?
>
> --
> http://hexmode.com/
>
> Any time you have "one overriding idea", and push your idea as a
> superior ideology, you're going to be wrong. ... The fact is,
> reality is complicated -- Linus Torvalds <http://hexm.de/mc>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


innocentkiller at gmail

Oct 14, 2012, 6:35 PM

Post #3 of 10 (614 views)
Permalink
Re: Tentative specs for MW releases [In reply to]

Release notes?

-Chad
On Oct 14, 2012 9:30 PM, "Tyler Romeo" <tylerromeo [at] gmail> wrote:

> I do like the idea of a semiannual release. On a related note, I also think
> we should have better plans on what is actually going to be in each
> release. In other words, a site administrator should be able to know what
> new features are planned for the next release before the actual release has
> been made. Maybe this already happens and I just don't know where this
> resource is.
> *--*
> *Tyler Romeo*
> Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
> Major in Computer Science
> www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody
> >wrote:
>
> > I said I would lay out my thoughts regarding MW releases this weekend,
> > so here goes.
> >
> > First: I want to provide a regular schedule so users know what to
> > expect, but something that a volunteer (me, for now) can achieve.
> >
> > Second: I want to provide something that Linux distributors can
> > incorporate into their distributions.
> >
> > To fulfill the first point, I think a release twice a year -- like
> > Ubuntu releases -- makes a lot of sense. This schedule also works for
> > Linux distributors like Ubuntu, Fedora, and OpenSuSE
> >
> > Since I started out using Debian (which has now adopted a 2 year freeze
> > cycle), I think it also makes sense to provide LTS support. Platonides
> > and I (but mostly Platonides) have been working with the Debian
> > developers to get 1.19 into Wheezy which was frozen in June.
> >
> > With that in mind, here is what I propose:
> >
> > 1.18.0 | Security updates till 1.20
> > 1.19.x | April 2012 (LTS)
> > 1.20.0 | October 2012
> > 1.21.0 | April 2013 (Start in May)
> > 1.22.0 | October 2013 (Start in September)
> > 1.23.0 | April 2014 (LTS)
> > 1.24.0 | October 2014
> > 1.25.0 | April 2015
> > 1.26.0 | October 2015
> > 1.27.0 | April 2016 (LTS)
> >
> > LTS releases will updates until (at least) the next LTS release. This
> > means security updates, but other updates that don't require schema
> > changes if people are interested in providing them. Since a couple of
> > people have put the 1.20.0 milestone on a handful of bugs, I'm assuming
> > now that they think those are worth merging to the 1.20 series. I'd
> > like to get the fixes backported to 1.19 as well, if possible.
> >
> > Well, that's pretty much it what I was thinking. How does this sound to
> > you guys?
> >
> > --
> > http://hexmode.com/
> >
> > Any time you have "one overriding idea", and push your idea as a
> > superior ideology, you're going to be wrong. ... The fact is,
> > reality is complicated -- Linus Torvalds <http://hexm.de/mc>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l [at] lists
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at everybody

Oct 16, 2012, 7:00 AM

Post #4 of 10 (602 views)
Permalink
Re: Tentative specs for MW releases [In reply to]

On 10/14/2012 09:29 PM, Tyler Romeo wrote:
> I also think
> we should have better plans on what is actually going to be in each
> release. In other words, a site administrator should be able to know what
> new features are planned for the next release before the actual release has
> been made. Maybe this already happens and I just don't know where this
> resource is.

Makes sense, and Chad points to the RELEASE-NOTES file as the place to
look for this.

That file is updated regularly by the MW developers. Maybe it does the
job you're looking for. Have you seen the file? RELEASE-NOTES-1.21 was
just recently started and you can see it on Gerrit[0].

Is this what you're talking about?

[0-short] <http://hexm.de/mn>
[0-long]
<https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=mediawiki/core.git;a=blob;f=RELEASE-NOTES-1.21>

--
http://hexmode.com/

Any time you have "one overriding idea", and push your idea as a
superior ideology, you're going to be wrong. ... The fact is,
reality is complicated -- Linus Torvalds <http://hexm.de/mc>

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


planetenxin at web

Oct 16, 2012, 7:43 AM

Post #5 of 10 (604 views)
Permalink
Re: Tentative specs for MW releases [In reply to]

I like the idea of LTS releases which are very useful in enterprise
environments with focus on stability and maintenance.

We typically build our MediaWiki Enterprise stacks on Ubuntu Server LTS...

/Alexander

Am 15.10.2012 03:26, schrieb Mark A. Hershberger:
> I said I would lay out my thoughts regarding MW releases this weekend,
> so here goes.
>
> First: I want to provide a regular schedule so users know what to
> expect, but something that a volunteer (me, for now) can achieve.
>
> Second: I want to provide something that Linux distributors can
> incorporate into their distributions.
>
> To fulfill the first point, I think a release twice a year -- like
> Ubuntu releases -- makes a lot of sense. This schedule also works for
> Linux distributors like Ubuntu, Fedora, and OpenSuSE
>
> Since I started out using Debian (which has now adopted a 2 year freeze
> cycle), I think it also makes sense to provide LTS support. Platonides
> and I (but mostly Platonides) have been working with the Debian
> developers to get 1.19 into Wheezy which was frozen in June.
>
> With that in mind, here is what I propose:
>
> 1.18.0 | Security updates till 1.20
> 1.19.x | April 2012 (LTS)
> 1.20.0 | October 2012
> 1.21.0 | April 2013 (Start in May)
> 1.22.0 | October 2013 (Start in September)
> 1.23.0 | April 2014 (LTS)
> 1.24.0 | October 2014
> 1.25.0 | April 2015
> 1.26.0 | October 2015
> 1.27.0 | April 2016 (LTS)
>
> LTS releases will updates until (at least) the next LTS release. This
> means security updates, but other updates that don't require schema
> changes if people are interested in providing them. Since a couple of
> people have put the 1.20.0 milestone on a handful of bugs, I'm assuming
> now that they think those are worth merging to the 1.20 series. I'd
> like to get the fixes backported to 1.19 as well, if possible.
>
> Well, that's pretty much it what I was thinking. How does this sound to
> you guys?
>


--
________________________________________________
semantic::apps by gesinn.it
Business Applications with Semantic Mediawiki.
http://semantic-apps.com

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at everybody

Oct 16, 2012, 8:05 AM

Post #6 of 10 (603 views)
Permalink
Re: Tentative specs for MW releases [In reply to]

On 10/16/2012 10:43 AM, planetenxin wrote:
> I like the idea of LTS releases which are very useful in enterprise
> environments with focus on stability and maintenance.
>
> We typically build our MediaWiki Enterprise stacks on Ubuntu Server LTS..

How many of these stacks do you deploy? Would you be willing to help
with the MW LTS releases?


--
http://hexmode.com/

Any time you have "one overriding idea", and push your idea as a
superior ideology, you're going to be wrong. ... The fact is,
reality is complicated -- Linus Torvalds <http://hexm.de/mc>

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


tylerromeo at gmail

Oct 16, 2012, 8:45 AM

Post #7 of 10 (603 views)
Permalink
Re: Tentative specs for MW releases [In reply to]

I am aware of the RELEASE-NOTES file. However, it is only updated once a
feature has been merged into the codebase, There should be some general
idea of at least what is planned for a release before the code is actually
written.
*--*
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
Major in Computer Science
www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail



On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody>wrote:

> On 10/14/2012 09:29 PM, Tyler Romeo wrote:
> > I also think
> > we should have better plans on what is actually going to be in each
> > release. In other words, a site administrator should be able to know what
> > new features are planned for the next release before the actual release
> has
> > been made. Maybe this already happens and I just don't know where this
> > resource is.
>
> Makes sense, and Chad points to the RELEASE-NOTES file as the place to
> look for this.
>
> That file is updated regularly by the MW developers. Maybe it does the
> job you're looking for. Have you seen the file? RELEASE-NOTES-1.21 was
> just recently started and you can see it on Gerrit[0].
>
> Is this what you're talking about?
>
> [0-short] <http://hexm.de/mn>
> [0-long]
> <
> https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=mediawiki/core.git;a=blob;f=RELEASE-NOTES-1.21
> >
>
> --
> http://hexmode.com/
>
> Any time you have "one overriding idea", and push your idea as a
> superior ideology, you're going to be wrong. ... The fact is,
> reality is complicated -- Linus Torvalds <http://hexm.de/mc>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at everybody

Oct 16, 2012, 9:18 AM

Post #8 of 10 (600 views)
Permalink
Re: Tentative specs for MW releases [In reply to]

On 10/16/2012 11:45 AM, Tyler Romeo wrote:
> There should be some general
> idea of at least what is planned for a release before the code is actually
> written.

This would mean getting any non-WMF contributors (the volunteers) to
spec out what they planned to work on before hand and be committed to
actually delivering it.

I'm not sure that is realistic.

It is realistic is getting a schedule for WMF-sponsored work, but a good
deal of that is not going to interest the average MW admin since it is
focused on Wikipedia.

As a sort of compromise, maybe we could write up a list of new features
MediaWiki administrators would find useful a month before the release is
planned. By that time, we've got a very good idea of what is going to
be in it.

It could be that I'm just too pessimistic, but I think that comes from
my introduction to the term "Cookie-Licking".

Mark.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


tylerromeo at gmail

Oct 16, 2012, 9:29 AM

Post #9 of 10 (600 views)
Permalink
Re: Tentative specs for MW releases [In reply to]

> As a sort of compromise, maybe we could write up a list of new features
> MediaWiki administrators would find useful a month before the release is
> planned. By that time, we've got a very good idea of what is going to
> be in it.


This seems like a good idea. Even if we never follow through with every
plan, the primary reason I think we need something like this is so
administrators can see what we're thinking about doing, and (possibly)
provide feedback on that. For example, if a sysadmin sees that OAuth is on
the list, they may come and say "This is awesome. You guys should totally
do OAuth." or something along those lines.

*--*
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
Major in Computer Science
www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail



On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody>wrote:

> On 10/16/2012 11:45 AM, Tyler Romeo wrote:
> > There should be some general
> > idea of at least what is planned for a release before the code is
> actually
> > written.
>
> This would mean getting any non-WMF contributors (the volunteers) to
> spec out what they planned to work on before hand and be committed to
> actually delivering it.
>
> I'm not sure that is realistic.
>
> It is realistic is getting a schedule for WMF-sponsored work, but a good
> deal of that is not going to interest the average MW admin since it is
> focused on Wikipedia.
>
> As a sort of compromise, maybe we could write up a list of new features
> MediaWiki administrators would find useful a month before the release is
> planned. By that time, we've got a very good idea of what is going to
> be in it.
>
> It could be that I'm just too pessimistic, but I think that comes from
> my introduction to the term "Cookie-Licking".
>
> Mark.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


innocentkiller at gmail

Oct 16, 2012, 9:30 AM

Post #10 of 10 (605 views)
Permalink
Re: Tentative specs for MW releases [In reply to]

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:
> On 10/16/2012 11:45 AM, Tyler Romeo wrote:
>> There should be some general
>> idea of at least what is planned for a release before the code is actually
>> written.
>
> This would mean getting any non-WMF contributors (the volunteers) to
> spec out what they planned to work on before hand and be committed to
> actually delivering it.
>
> I'm not sure that is realistic.
>
> It is realistic is getting a schedule for WMF-sponsored work, but a good
> deal of that is not going to interest the average MW admin since it is
> focused on Wikipedia.
>
> As a sort of compromise, maybe we could write up a list of new features
> MediaWiki administrators would find useful a month before the release is
> planned. By that time, we've got a very good idea of what is going to
> be in it.
>
> It could be that I'm just too pessimistic, but I think that comes from
> my introduction to the term "Cookie-Licking".
>

Indeed, I agree on all the points here. Lots of things happen in
development because somebody has been working on something
and then commits it. This is perfectly ok--we don't want to
discourage anyone by saying "That's not on the plan."

I think the idea of starting the general release notes maybe a month
(or two) out from release is a good idea. It allows the release to start
taking shape and we can start targeting a sane branch point. It also
would happen when we generally start to "slush" master and ask
people to hold off on earth-shattering changes since a branch point is
coming up.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Wikipedia wikitech RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.