[Koha-devel] [Koha] Current, Simple-to-install, Installed LiveCDs/LiveDVDs are okay ( was Re: Avoid LiveCDs/LiveDVDs)

[Paul]

Moving this to devel rather than users (apologies if anyone feels this 
should remain in general circulation.)

At 05:41 PM 10/6/2012 +0800, Mark Tompsett wrote:
[snip]
>If it installs easily to a hard drive and let's them have a 
>packages-based, ...

Mark - could you please explain your fixation with "packages-based"? (by 
which I *think* you mean .deb files -- please correct me if I'm mistaken.) 
I've been using "packages" for fifty years; they used to come in the post 
-- a cardboard box of punched cards -- then [t]ape [ar]chives hence 'tar' 
-- then standardized in the 1980s by IEEE/POSIX. They permit good 
transmission, particularly with modern compression and checksum techniques, 
of directory structure, permissions, linking, etc. They're usable in all 
*nix environments, not just the Debian family, but RHEL, AIX, Solaris, 
SuSE, BSD ... (even my old favourite Slackware.)

A .tar is somewhat universal; .deb, .rpm, are o/s specific.  Why limit the 
scope?  Why not concentrate on the best possible quality of an ubiquitous 
.tar?

>that is a good thing for non-technical people with a production environment.

Please, how many "production environments" are run by "non-technical 
people"? (or at least without access to "technical" people?) Is Koha 
destined for amateurs only? Even my local, rural, very small, public 
library uses the municipal IT department personnel (they're on SirsiDynix.)

[snip]
>Chris Cormack wrote:
>>Doing 2 LiveCD releases every month is a reasonable amount
>>of work so I applaud them for wanting to.
>
>I agree monthly would be perfect, but even every 6 months (in line with 
>the new releases 3.10.0, 3.12.0, etc.) would be sufficient (not perfect, 
>but sufficient).

Recognizing that I'm wandering from "live CDs", a Koha LTS should be the 
goal -- with security updates -- for a two year cycle in a production 
environment. I, and colleagues from other libraries, don't have policy, 
budgets or the inclination to play "new releases" every month, probably not 
even every six months; that's OK for video games, but not when your IT 
department is responsible for records in the hundreds of thousands (or many 
millions via Z39.xx standards.)

On the other hand, enhancements are a marvelous idea, leading up to a "next 
LTS", and those of us who have time and the facilities should be 
encouraged. Such releases can be labeled "latest|whatever", but not "stable."

[snip]
>Though, current and previous stable releases on a monthly basis are 
>probably best. Hopefully this clarifies everything from my perspective. :)

My knowledge of upgrade 3.6.x. to 3.8.x (12 month period) is a testament as 
to why an LTS, with more complete QA (or at least full documentation) 
should be on Koha's horizon (and to pre-empt comments concerning why I 
should search git and bugs and wiki and INSTALL (all variants deb, ubuntu, 
bland) and community and devel and users and download and ... I'm sure you 
understand.)

Thanks and best regards - Paul