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

[Chris Cormack]

Patches accepted

Chris
On Oct 7, 2012 12:08 PM, "Paul" <paul.a at aandc.org> wrote:

> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/koha-devel/attachments/20121007/9c8784e4/attachment-0001.htm>