Hi Guys,
Following Dag's idea (May I Dag ?) of create a CentOS timeline graphical table ... here is a variation of it made last month. Maybe it could be used on http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General#head-fe8a0be91ee3e7dea812e8694491e1dde5b7... as ilustration.
It is a svg file with markers that could be included into our Artwork Building Environment to have it on different languages. Actually the "You are here" pointer is modified manually. Some way to automate this would be cool (IMO).
See:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&... http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
What do you think ?
Cheers, al.
On 10/08/2008 08:44 PM, Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
Hi Guys,
Following Dag's idea (May I Dag ?) of create a CentOS timeline graphical table ... here is a variation of it made last month. Maybe it could be used on http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General#head-fe8a0be91ee3e7dea812e8694491e1dde5b7... as ilustration.
It is a svg file with markers that could be included into our Artwork Building Environment to have it on different languages. Actually the "You are here" pointer is modified manually. Some way to automate this would be cool (IMO).
See:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&... http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
What do you think ?
s/4.6/4.7/ :)
Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 10/08/2008 08:44 PM, Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
See:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
That one gives me errors.
Ralph
On 10/8/08, Ralph Angenendt ra+centos@br-online.de wrote:
Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 10/08/2008 08:44 PM, Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
See:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
That one gives me errors.
You are right ! ... it seems like it needs to be rendered again.
Thanks, al.
On 10/8/08, Alain Reguera Delgado alain.reguera@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/8/08, Ralph Angenendt ra+centos@br-online.de wrote:
Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 10/08/2008 08:44 PM, Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
See:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
That one gives me errors.
You are right ! ... it seems like it needs to be rendered again.
But they are fixed now ... check the link once again please.
Thanks, al.
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
Following Dag's idea (May I Dag ?) of create a CentOS timeline graphical table ... here is a variation of it made last month. Maybe it could be used on http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General#head-fe8a0be91ee3e7dea812e8694491e1dde5b7... as ilustration.
It is a svg file with markers that could be included into our Artwork Building Environment to have it on different languages. Actually the "You are here" pointer is modified manually. Some way to automate this would be cool (IMO).
See:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&... http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
What do you think ?
It definitely looks better.
But is it easy to update ? Over the course of a year I had to change it a few times. Usually to update it before a new presentation. Adding update releases, shifting support times.
Also, it is missing the update releases, which is an important item in comparison to Ubuntu LTS or SLES wrt. hardware support and new media.
BTW The RHEL6 release will not be before the second quarter of 2009, possibly after Fedora 11. So as you can see that major releases have been shifting from 1.5 years to 2 year and now past 2 years.
At that pace 7 years may no longer constitute 4 releases. Unless Red Hat will at some point in time push the support time to 8 years or more. In itself not unthinkable if the company keeps growing.
I'd be interested to look at the SVG to see how we could improve it further and whether it is mergable in OpenOffice (SVG support is flaky at best).
On 10/8/08, Dag Wieers dag@centos.org wrote:
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
...
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&... http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
What do you think ?
It definitely looks better.
But is it easy to update ? Over the course of a year I had to change it a few times. Usually to update it before a new presentation. Adding update releases, shifting support times.
Well ... each update needs a svg file modification and to update the related translation files. After that you'd have the image in as many languages as translation files exist.
Also, it is missing the update releases, which is an important item in comparison to Ubuntu LTS or SLES wrt. hardware support and new media.
Yep, where are those dates ? I would like to add them.
BTW The RHEL6 release will not be before the second quarter of 2009, possibly after Fedora 11. So as you can see that major releases have been shifting from 1.5 years to 2 year and now past 2 years.
At that pace 7 years may no longer constitute 4 releases. Unless Red Hat will at some point in time push the support time to 8 years or more. In itself not unthinkable if the company keeps growing.
Guys, could you provide a table with CentOS Relsease/Update dates. Those that you would like to see in the graphical display ?
I'd be interested to look at the SVG to see how we could improve it further and whether it is mergable in OpenOffice (SVG support is flaky at best).
Absolutely. It would be released in https://projects.centos.org/svn/artwork/trunk/Main/svg/templates/ very soon.
Cheers, al.
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
On 10/8/08, Dag Wieers dag@centos.org wrote:
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
...
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&... http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
What do you think ?
It definitely looks better.
But is it easy to update ? Over the course of a year I had to change it a few times. Usually to update it before a new presentation. Adding update releases, shifting support times.
Well ... each update needs a svg file modification and to update the related translation files. After that you'd have the image in as many languages as translation files exist.
Also, it is missing the update releases, which is an important item in comparison to Ubuntu LTS or SLES wrt. hardware support and new media.
Yep, where are those dates ? I would like to add them.
I got them from different release announcement from RHEL. The timeline BTW is the RHEL timeline and not the CentOS timeline.
In fact if you would use the CentOS timeline then there would be gaps and delays. This is something I tell during the presentation because the slide is not just about CentOS. Much like the presentation is more about Enerprise Linux than it is about CentOS.
BTW The RHEL6 release will not be before the second quarter of 2009, possibly after Fedora 11. So as you can see that major releases have been shifting from 1.5 years to 2 year and now past 2 years.
At that pace 7 years may no longer constitute 4 releases. Unless Red Hat will at some point in time push the support time to 8 years or more. In itself not unthinkable if the company keeps growing.
Guys, could you provide a table with CentOS Relsease/Update dates. Those that you would like to see in the graphical display ?
I don't have the list. I mapped them directly on the grid while I was doing them. Google is your friend.
Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
I cant see the other one, but this one is incorrect. neither 4.6 nor 5.2 or 3.9 have those lifecycles.
The CentOS Version if 3 or 4 or 5, the point bit is only a revision under that and we need to make sure that its clear to people that what they run is CentOS-5 and not CentOS-5.2
People who *really* *really* need to care, are very very few, and they can work the relationship out between 5.2 and 5.1 themselves. If they cant, they dont need to care.
Perhaps an alternate display with 2 dimensions that could have point release info, as well as lifecycle info ? Or is there some other way to highlight the fact that while 5.2 is the latest release CentOS-5, its not what CentOS-5 is going to be forever ( which is what it looks like from this image ).
- KB
Hi.
The CentOS Version if 3 or 4 or 5, the point bit is only a revision under that and we need to make sure that its clear to people that what they run is CentOS-5 and not CentOS-5.2
People who *really* *really* need to care, are very very few, and they can work the relationship out between 5.2 and 5.1 themselves. If they cant, they dont need to care.
Perhaps an alternate display with 2 dimensions that could have point release info, as well as lifecycle info ? Or is there some other way to highlight the fact that while 5.2 is the latest release CentOS-5, its not what CentOS-5 is going to be forever ( which is what it looks like from this image ).
I think we should just mention the major releases (eg. 2,3,4,5).
Best Regards Marcus
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
I cant see the other one, but this one is incorrect. neither 4.6 nor 5.2 or 3.9 have those lifecycles.
The CentOS Version if 3 or 4 or 5, the point bit is only a revision under that and we need to make sure that its clear to people that what they run is CentOS-5 and not CentOS-5.2
People who *really* *really* need to care, are very very few, and they can work the relationship out between 5.2 and 5.1 themselves. If they cant, they dont need to care.
Perhaps an alternate display with 2 dimensions that could have point release info, as well as lifecycle info ? Or is there some other way to highlight the fact that while 5.2 is the latest release CentOS-5, its not what CentOS-5 is going to be forever ( which is what it looks like from this image ).
That's why I indicated the update releases in my image. And that is why I put the release version at the end (and not at the front) of the timeline.
However, the image includes much more information than a normal individual can get out of it without someone guiding them. So while I am not that concerned with the fact that someone may interprete it wrongly, I do think that the text (or explanation) that comes with it should highlight some of the things that would normally be told during a presentation.
This slide and the next one need guidance anyhow to transfer the full message.
BTW if you compare it to the release-cycle Canonical released after my blog-post it is very easy to be misled by what Ubuntu LTS offers.
On 10/9/08, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
I cant see the other one, but this one is incorrect. neither 4.6 nor 5.2 or 3.9 have those lifecycles.
I'll remake the images based on the available wiki FAQs dates. Wait for it.
The CentOS Version if 3 or 4 or 5, the point bit is only a revision under that and we need to make sure that its clear to people that what they run is CentOS-5 and not CentOS-5.2
People who *really* *really* need to care, are very very few, and they can work the relationship out between 5.2 and 5.1 themselves. If they cant, they dont need to care.
Perhaps an alternate display with 2 dimensions that could have point release info, as well as lifecycle info ? Or is there some other way to highlight the fact that while 5.2 is the latest release CentOS-5, its not what CentOS-5 is going to be forever ( which is what it looks like from this image ).
Karan, I take your mail to home ... I'll try to display these ideas.
Due the release timeline ... could we predict which will be the last release/update number of each major version ? Maybe a timeline could reflect in a more simple and clear way where people are ... something like:
Full Updates: --------|--------|--------|--------|--------|-------| 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5
Maintainance Updates: --------|--------|--------|--------|--------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9
where 5.5 is the last Full Update, and 5.9 the last Maintainance Update.
Thanks, al.
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
On 10/9/08, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
Alain Reguera Delgado wrote:
http://wiki.centos.org/AlainRegueraDelgado?action=AttachFile&do=get&...
I cant see the other one, but this one is incorrect. neither 4.6 nor 5.2 or 3.9 have those lifecycles.
I'll remake the images based on the available wiki FAQs dates. Wait for it.
The CentOS Version if 3 or 4 or 5, the point bit is only a revision under that and we need to make sure that its clear to people that what they run is CentOS-5 and not CentOS-5.2
People who *really* *really* need to care, are very very few, and they can work the relationship out between 5.2 and 5.1 themselves. If they cant, they dont need to care.
Perhaps an alternate display with 2 dimensions that could have point release info, as well as lifecycle info ? Or is there some other way to highlight the fact that while 5.2 is the latest release CentOS-5, its not what CentOS-5 is going to be forever ( which is what it looks like from this image ).
Karan, I take your mail to home ... I'll try to display these ideas.
Due the release timeline ... could we predict which will be the last release/update number of each major version ? Maybe a timeline could reflect in a more simple and clear way where people are ... something like:
Full Updates: --------|--------|--------|--------|--------|-------| 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5Maintainance Updates: --------|--------|--------|--------|--------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9
where 5.5 is the last Full Update, and 5.9 the last Maintainance Update.
Unfortunately we can not predict future update releases. :)
But if minor releases could be added like shown above it would indeed be much clearer. Sadly it was practically impossible to do that in OpenOffice the way I implemented it and make it readable on the slides.
-
Alain Reguera Delgado -
Dag Wieers -
Karanbir Singh -
Manuel Wolfshant -
Marcus Moeller -
Ralph Angenendt