Greetings,
I was wondering if we should start to gather some ideas of what we would agree on to be deserving the label »official Koha LiveCD« -- or if we would not want that label at all.
If we don't put that label, then the other even more outdated Live CD/DVD's look like they have the same validity, which they wouldn't. I think the label is necessary.
- being up-to-date [snip] I don't know if it is realistic to expect a fresh disk each month (or even two, for stable and oldstable)?! Would there be less stressful release cycles imaginable for this kind of release?
This is why I suggested that the Live CD/DVD should install as if it were packages, then "sudo apt-get update; sudo apt-get upgrade" with perhaps a "sudo apt-get dist-upgrade" would be simple enough to keep it up to date. Then a new release of 2 (stable and previous) every 6 months (upon next release) should be the bare minimum release schedule.
- bug tracking/ transparency Koha development happens mostly in the open and can be observed on bugzilla and git. It would be nice to see a »LiveCD« section on bugzilla that is assigned to the LiveCD Manager to be able to give feedback on bugs specific to this form of release, discuss development and also have some people test new releases of the disk before release.
+1 -- Great idea! GPML, Mark Tompsett