[CentOS] EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

Mon May 16 02:00:15 UTC 2011
Ron Blizzard <rb4centos at gmail.com>

On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Gordon Messmer <yinyang at eburg.com> wrote:

> Look at wikipedia's page describing CentOS.  They include a column for
> the delay between the upstream release and CentOS's.  For the 5 series,
> it looks like:
> Release Delay
> 5       28d
> 5.1     25d
> 5.2     34d
> 5.3     69d
> 5.4     49d
> 5.5     44d
> 5.6     85d
> Almost every release in the 5 series took longer than the initial
> release for 5.0.  Even if you ignore the release of 5.6, there is a
> generally upward trend in the amount of time taken for each release.
> How could anyone reasonably claim that CentOS is NOT getting worse on
> release dates?

So, when you take 5.6 out of the mix (taking into account the three
releases at once), the average time from Red Hat 5.x release to CentOS
5.x release is 41.5 days. And 5.5 was 44 days. Your point? Up until
5.6 the longest it took for a CentOS 5.x release was 69 days, 5.4 took
49 days and 5.5 took 44 days. Is that going up or down? Take 5.3 out
of the mix (as well as the three-release 5.6) and you've got an
average of 36 days. Just barely over a month. Even with 5.3 it
averages about a month and a half. 5.6 (and 5.3) were the aberrations,
not the average. Thanks for the figures. They don't prove your point.

> I can't even begin to comprehend the logical failure behind the idea
> that because SL and CentOS are keeping up with each other that CentOS is
> not getting worse.  Again, Dag interjected only to ask why any
> reasonable person would expect 6.1 to take only one month when 5.6 took
> three.  The fact that there is a general trend toward longer release
> delays supports that question.

Again, three releases at once. Up until then, the previous two 5.x
releases came down in the number of days between upstream release and
CentOS rebuild. You've got the facts right in front of your nose and
you still get it wrong. And I don't know what happened at release 5.3,
but SL took 57 days on that one -- so I'm guessing something was added
to the mix.

> That's fine, but that's not what's being discussed.

So, on average (without 5.6) less than a month a half per release --
so a month for 6.1 is not that far off.

RonB -- Using CentOS 5.6