From: Tony B. <tb...@gm...> - 2006-04-06 12:32:41
|
On 4/6/06, uel archuletta <ue...@gm...> wrote: > > Sounds good. I have some additions to a few of your propositions. here > thay are > > 1. we have some package list we may be able to use to help in this they > are in ftp in the VL6base folder. > 2. I nominate you to build the base and get it setup for us. :) > OK 3. sounds good, but do we have enough people to seperate into 2 groups? > If not 2 groups, then each dev can have 2 partitions for dev - std and soho= . This shouldn't be too bad a task if we have all the pkgs decided upon at th= e beginning and hand out the workload equally. Remember, in the past Robert did std by himself and I did soho by myself on top of std so it is possible= . 4. agree > 5. agree > 6. I along with others would like to see this borken down further. > base-cli, dev, X, std, soho, some examples would be the package lists in > VL6base on ftp. > base-cli and dev will have to be 1 since we can't work on a base without de= v tools. X - if by this you mean xorg alone then I agree but if this includes WM's,etc then no. 7. I think there should be a seperation in release dates. 1 reason is > Distrowatch another is easier for us to debug. > 8.agree > 9.agree > 10.agree > 11. see #7 > 12. I really like this idea > 13. agree > 14. agree > > some really good ideas here Tony. > Thanks, > > Uel > > > On 4/5/06, Tony Brijeski <tb...@gm...> wrote: > > > > Sorry if this has already been decided upon but I haven't been made > > aware of it so here goes. > > > > I have been looking at these as I'm sure some or all of you have as > > well. > > > > I think we can work with these to build our base from source and then > > expand on them in the future. > > > > There were a few of us on irc last night chatting about it. > > > > This is how I think we should move forward with this: > > > > 1 - as a group, decide on all the packages for both std vl and soho > > before we start > > 2 - 1 person designated to build the bare minimum base(a/ap/d/l/k sourc= e > > trees) - probably either myself or Uel or anyone that wants to take > > ownership of this task - all base build scripts need to be corrected fo= r > > arch,flags,etc > > 3 - once the base is built, each developer is given a source tree or > > trees and they work on those on top of the base(vlbase.tgz).eg. > > kde,xap,etc - all packages must be built on a virgin base except for so= ho - > > 2 groups are needed here - std and soho and there will be some duplicat= ion > > as std and soho should be treated as separate distros - all build scrip= ts > > need to corrected for arch,flags,etc > > 4 - we need to come up with SlackBuilds for the packages we include tha= t > > aren't in slack and split this up depending on how many pkgs there are > > 5 - upload all the built packages to the respective trees and each of u= s > > install them for testing. > > 6 - once testing is completed, we package these up for the cd into > > vl-base.tgz,vl-std.tgz, and vl-soho.tgz - all X and related packages > > should reside in vl-std.tgz and vl-soho.tgz so that SOHO can be KDE onl= y > > and have all packages built for it using kde as a dep. > > 7 - release beta std and soho at the same time > > 8 - set a beta test schedule of 2 weeks > > 9 - fix and release rc > > 10 - set an rc test schedule of 2 weeks and repeat 9 and 10 until > > stable. > > 11 - release final std and soho at the same time. > > 12 - designate a dev for each versions - std and soho - whose primary > > responsibility will be security patching > > 13 - start working on extra packages for the repo > > 14 - once there is a large repo of apps available, start the next cycle > > at step 1 > > > > Let me know what you all think. Having this process more organized and > > coordinated will allow us to work quicker and more efficiently giving u= s > > more time to create the extra app repo that is needed to take VL to the= next > > level. That way when Robert becomes rich from VL, he will share with al= l of > > us - lol. > > > > Regards, > > Tony > > > > > > |