Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Status report

2010-08-02 03:57:02
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Status report
From: Bruno Friedmann <bruno AT ioda-net DOT ch>
To: bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 09:51:49 +0200
Hello Kern,

On 07/23/2010 05:54 PM, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> This is a sort of mini-Bacula status report on the following:
> 
> 1. Next release
> 
> 2. New release cycle
> 
> 3. New bugs tracking database
> 
> 4. New Bacula server (www.bacula.org)
> 
> 5. New Bacula source distribution server
> 
> 1. Next release:
> Before the end of August, we will be releasing the next version of Bacula -- 
> version 5.0.3 which is a bug fix update to 5.0.2.  This release is almost 
> ready and the most recent code is in the SF bacula git repository under 
> Branch-5.0

Thanks for that, and all the good works done, as usually.

> 
> 2. New release cycle:
> The little code we currently have for the next major release is in the SF 
> bacula git repository under Branch-5.1.
> 
> We are considering to moving to a regular 6 month release cycle. The 
> advantage 
> of such a cycle is that it gets features out to you faster.  The disadvantage 
> is that it doesn't work so well in small projects like Bacula if there are 
> not sufficient contributions.
> 
> Such a release would consist of the following points:
> 
> - A release every 6 months
> - The deadline is not absolute and could be extended to 9 months if there were
>   insufficient new submissions.
> - There will be far fewer or no bug fix updates as they are not really needed
>   if we can maintain a 6 month cycle.
> - Two months before the projected release we will decide if there are
>   sufficient new features to release
> - The release count down will consist of 3 phases
>      1.  We will add all new approved features
>           The first 4 months after a release this phase will go into
>           effect for the next release
>    - 2. Only very small new features (a few lines) will be added
>           Two months before the final release this phase will go into
>           effect.  Note, this phase can be delayed 3 months if insufficient
>           new features are submitted
>      3. Only bug fixes
>          This phase will go into effect one month before the release
> 
> Under this scheme, we are currently in Phase 3 for the 5.0.3 release, and the 
> next major release (5.2.0) would be made before mid-January 2011, and is 
> currently under development in Branch-5.1 on Source Forge.
> 
> I would appreciate comments on this proposed new "deadline" release cycle.

If generally the 6 month schedule is used in FOSS project, I'm seeing more & 
more exhausted users & admin
to always update. There's sometimes good reasons, sometimes not. following the 
adage : if it's not breaked, don't change it.

I've no idea for Bacula is this would work. Bacula & the backup stuff are long 
time cycles. So if a 6 months release cycle take
place, a special attention is needed to permit easy migration/update from the 2 
previous release ( 5.0.0 5.0.2 -> 5.0.3 for
example). Perhaps giving more importance (helping those who want to do that) to 
the regressing test installation.

I also be interested in the cycle release you will have with Bacula-System's 
enterprise edition ?

For example, I've one customers which doesn't want to change anything before a 
new server come. And it run the 1.38.11 version
(1.38 do what it has to do : reliable backup and restore)

I don't know how fragmented (in term of version running outside) is the bacula 
installed base is. And this quick release can
raise this. But seeing new feature & bug fixes coming out regularly, can also 
prove to outside how in wellness the project is
and make some FOSS marketing about that.

My last suggestion, is trying to find a way ( that's not so easy but who knows 
) to have a maximum release made one or two month
before the launch of big block distribution : giving time to packagers to 
include them inside their next release


> 
> 3. New bugs tracking database
> Sometime in early August (possibly slightly before) we will be moving the 
> current Mantis based bug tracking system to a new RT based system hosted by 
> Bacula Systems.  The upside is that the RT system is far more powerful, 
> flexible and adaptible, and most important of all, it allows email responses 
> to bugs.  The downside is that it is a bit more complicated (as are most 
> things that have more features) and that it will require everyone to 
> re-register for the new system.  In addition, if you don't want to rely on 
> just the community to furnish bug fixes, you will be able to subscribe to a 
> bug fix service that is more professional and has a guaranteed response time 
> (not to be mistaken for a guaranteed fix time).  More on this when the 
> service is ready for production.
<joke>
What ? We need to recreate the account, this is a real pain :-)
</joke>



> 
> 4. New Bacula server
> The current Bacula Community server is as you probably know generously 
> offered 
> by UKFast.  However, the hardware is starting to age, so they have gratiously 
> provided us with a new machine that we will be putting in place in the next 
> few weeks.  We don't expect that you will notice any differences, but the 
> hardware running www.bacula.org should be more stable.
> 
> 5. New Bacula source distribution server
> You may or may not be aware that we have not always been pleased with the 
> services offered by Source Forge.  The uploading is complicated by lines 
> dropping (I have *never* seen this else where), their user interface is 
> horrible, we don't get good statistics, being US based, they block direct 
> access to our code from a number of countries such as Cuba, ...  So, probably 
> in September or October we will be moving our Bacula project off of Source 
> Forge to a new server provided by UKFast.  There is still a *lot* of work to 
> be done to make this work -- principally getting up a good and suitable 
> interface for users -- more as this develops.
> 

Congrats to this change, it will be nice to see it's real.
Did you also want to move the ML ?

> As mentioned above, I would appreciate any comments you might have, 
> particularly on the proposed new release cycle.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Kern
> 



-- 

Bruno Friedmann  bruno (at) ioda-net.ch

Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch

  openSUSE Member
    User www.ioda.net/r/osu
    Blog www.ioda.net/r/blog

  fsfe fellowship www.fsfe.org
  (bruno.friedmann (at) fsfe.org )

  tigerfoot on irc

GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Palm PDK Hot Apps Program offers developers who use the
Plug-In Development Kit to bring their C/C++ apps to Palm for a share
of $1 Million in cash or HP Products. Visit us here for more details:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/dev2dev-palm
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Status report, Bruno Friedmann <=