Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #260979 > unrolled thread

Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12? Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 07:00 +0200
    Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12? "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2023-08-17 08:20 +0200
      Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12? Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d63c@ewoof.net> - 2023-08-17 10:00 +0200
        Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12? Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d63c@ewoof.net> - 2023-08-17 12:50 +0200
        Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-08-17 13:40 +0200
          Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-08-17 13:50 +0200
            Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12? songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2023-08-17 22:30 +0200
              Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12? Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 21:20 +0200
        Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12? Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2023-08-17 19:20 +0200

#260979 — Re: is it unusual that 12.1 is released so soon after 12?

7: 2013-05-04  https://www.debian.org/News/2013/20130504
7.1: 2013-06-15  https://www.debian.org/News/2013/20130615
42 days

8: 2015-04-25  https://www.debian.org/News/2015/20150426
8.1: 2015-06-06  https://www.debian.org/News/2015/20150606
42 days

9: 2017-06-17  https://www.debian.org/News/2017/20170617
9.1: 2017-07-22  https://www.debian.org/News/2017/20170722
35 days

10: 2019-07-06  https://www.debian.org/News/2019/20190706
10.1: 2019-09-07  https://www.debian.org/News/2019/20190907
63 days

11: 2021-08-14  https://www.debian.org/News/2021/20210814
11.1: 2021-10-09  https://www.debian.org/News/2021/20211009
56 days

12: 2023-06-10  https://www.debian.org/News/2023/20230610
12.1: 2023-07-22  https://www.debian.org/News/2023/20230722
42 days

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#260980

On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 01:20:26PM +0800, hlyg wrote:
> Thank Mike Castle!
> 
> i suppose update cycle becomes short if there are major important patch,
> correction or adjustments
> 
>

I think the aim is to have a roughly 2 month cycle per point release for 
the current stable and a 3-4 month release for "oldstable" during the first
year after a release.

That does mean, if you're unlucky, that there gets to be a double release
every now and again - which means a very long weekend of building and testing.

There are some people who will never ever use a dot-0 release. It's quite
safe to do this in Debian as it will hve had about two years of testing
prior to release.

The idea of a point release is also to periodically round up security fixes
and publish them in a block. If you update regularly - say once a week -
to pick up fixes and patches, then a point release will change very little
indeed.

All the very best, as ever,

Andy 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260981

On 17 Aug 2023 06:13 +0000, from amacater@einval.com (Andrew M.A. Cater):
> There are some people who will never ever use a dot-0 release. It's quite
> safe to do this in Debian as it will hve had about two years of testing
> prior to release.

Right. I personally opted to wait for 12.1 before upgrading, for a
slew of reasons, and I still have some systems left to upgrade. It's
not like 11.x would drop off the face of the Earth just because 12.0
was out.

Also, as Mike Castle already did, it's more meaningful in this case to
compare the time between various recent-ish x.0 to the corresponding
x.1; and in that comparison, 12.0 to 12.1 doesn't particularly stand
out either way.

-- 
Michael Kjörling                     🔗 https://michael.kjorling.se
“Remember when, on the Internet, nobody cared that you were a dog?”

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260983

On 17 Aug 2023 18:14 +0800, from hlyg2023@outlook.com (hlyg):
> it seems that x.1 are really stable while x are beta release

I would not characterize Debian x.0 as "beta".

-- 
Michael Kjörling                     🔗 https://michael.kjorling.se
“Remember when, on the Internet, nobody cared that you were a dog?”

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260984

Hi,

On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 06:14:16PM +0800, hlyg wrote:
> it seems that x.1 are really stable while x are beta release

That is not by design, but by largely unavoidable consequence, and
so a Debian stable release is not considered a "beta" ion any
respect.

There will never be as diverse a user base for a testing release as
there will be for a stable release. Some people have for this reason
chosen to wait for "first update" of software releases as long as
there has been software, far previous to the existence of Debian.

Obviously you can't just not release it as you will still never get
the desired amount of testing, nor know what that desired level
actually is (an unknown unknown).

There's more information here:

https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases/PointReleases

Cheers,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260985

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 11:32:49AM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 06:14:16PM +0800, hlyg wrote:
> > it seems that x.1 are really stable while x are beta release
> 
> That is not by design, but by largely unavoidable consequence, and
> so a Debian stable release is not considered a "beta" ion any
> respect.

I think that the best correspondence to the "beta" idea in Debian
is the freeze process (explained here [1] for buster). So x.0 is
considered "release quality".

The freeze process is designed to cope with the specialties of a
big and complex software distribution, where you want its many
interdependent parts to "settle" in "layers", starting from the
most fundamental ones and propagating to the "leaves".

Cheers

[1] https://release.debian.org/bookworm/freeze_policy.html
-- 
t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260991

<tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 11:32:49AM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 06:14:16PM +0800, hlyg wrote:
>> > it seems that x.1 are really stable while x are beta release
>> 
>> That is not by design, but by largely unavoidable consequence, and
>> so a Debian stable release is not considered a "beta" ion any
>> respect.
>
> I think that the best correspondence to the "beta" idea in Debian
> is the freeze process (explained here [1] for buster). So x.0 is
> considered "release quality".
>
> The freeze process is designed to cope with the specialties of a
> big and complex software distribution, where you want its many
> interdependent parts to "settle" in "layers", starting from the
> most fundamental ones and propagating to the "leaves".
>
> Cheers
>
> [1] https://release.debian.org/bookworm/freeze_policy.html

  sometimes it may be more like fermenting before it 
settles.  :)

  i appreciate everything that people do for Debian from
the development to the testing to the refinements and even
to the sometimes long drawn out discussions about how to
do something or how to fix things or make them better.

  and then those who help the rest of us out and keep us
somewhat on the straight and narrow pathway towards 
nerdvanna.


  songbird

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#261011

I think it is kind of like buying a new ANYTHING.

Some folks will buy a new model as soon as it comes out.

Some will wait a few months to see if anyone else is having problems with it.

Whether it is a vehicle, electronic device, refrigerator, MS-Windows,
new online service, etc.

As more folks use the ANYTHING, more issues will be found.
Fortunately with something like operating systems, changes/fixes can
usually be made fairly quickly.

mrc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260988

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

* On 2023 17 Aug 05:15 -0500, hlyg wrote:
> Thank  Andrew, Michael and Joe!
> 
> it seems that x.1 are really stable while x are beta release

And .2, .3, etc. are even more stable by that metric.  Best to wait for
12.7 or later then.  In the mean time the rest of us have work to do
with the updated tools.

Sometimes even the first point release will catch us unawares as with
gnome-keyring-daemon crashes/restarts not long after logging into GNOME
on this desktop system.  So far this only affects one system of mine
running Bookworm and not the other.  It could be a glitch of my making
but I'm unaware of anything I did to cause the keyring applet problems
where it was working without issue on Bullseye and Buster previously.

If Bullseye is working for you, then you may want to wait until such
time as it will no longer receive security updates.  Unlike other
systems, Debian doesn't force anyone to upgrade.

- Nate

-- 
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
Web: https://www.n0nb.us
Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web