<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>To add my perspective:</p>
<p>I fully agree with Francois' vision. What we need long-term is</p>
<p>- a user-facing OS that is stable, but which receives timely
updates to UX-relevant parts of the stack (primarily GNOME and its
dependencies, but probably also popular browsers, and a few other
apps and developer tools). We don't want to split our OS in two
for enterprise/consumer, as it would have very problematic effects
on the developer ecosystem and the cohesion of the platform (e.g.
apps designed for the fresher consumer version might not work on
the enterprise one).<br>
</p>
<p>- a way to do integration testing with in-development parts of
the stack (primarily GNOME and things we need for the phone).
Ideally, this would always have nightly versions of the entire
GNOME platform throughout the development cycle. Most likely we'd
need to do this in close collaboration with some GNOME people.<br>
</p>
<p>- great flatpak integration for third-party apps (to alleviate
the need to have the latest version of every random app packged)
and the PureOS Store</p>
<p>What we need to do to get there is a different question :)</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Regarding the current choice between Debian stable and testing:
We can't go with Debian stable, unless we find a way to get
up-to-date versions of GNOME and all its dependecies on top of
that. I have a hunch that this isn't easily possible, but it's
hardly my area of expertise :)</p>
<p>Continuing with Debian testing seems like the more sustainable
route short-term, though we still need to figure out how to get
up-to-date GNOME during freeze periods, such as the current one.
Since other Debian-based distributions, such as Ubuntu are going
to do this as well, it seems at least theoretically doable.<br>
</p>
<p>Longer-term I'd be interested in exploring alternative options,
such as rebasing the OS on Endless OS, Ubuntu, or Fedora
Silverblue, all of which have different, potentially interesting
solutions to this problem. Sooner or later we'll want to go in a
fully containerized direction a la Silverblue, so this might be
good to factor into the decision we take now.<br>
</p>
<p>Cheers,<br>
Tobias<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/20/19 12:47 PM, Jonas Smedegaard
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:155308244949.19101.14721795382779136378@auryn.jones.dk">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Quoting François Téchené (2019-03-20 12:09:38)
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
On 19/03/2019 20:50, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Ok, so "our users" is one target, not several.
Not "enterprise customers" needing particularly stable system and
"existing users" expecting a constant flow of updates from Debian
testing.
All users are in same boat, and the boat goes in the direction that
the majority need to go.
Makes good sense.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Exactly, I think that in term of expectation, both enterprise and
everyday customers will expect a system that is stable, easily usable
and feature full.
Stability and usability are stronger in that expectation so we
shouldn't target users looking for cutting edge features that are
breaking stability and usability on the default experience.
So in term of priority regarding the customers experience, we have the
following :
1 - Stability
2 - Usability
3 - Features
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Let me provoke you...
So until the feature and usability improvements are stable integrated
with the system, we should provide our users a system _without_ those
improvements?
I translate that to basing PureOS on Debian stable, not Debian testing,
even if that means missing out on GNOME 3.32 and libhandy.
(except on the phone where Debian stable is "too stable" i.e. broken).
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">The fact of improving GNOME is directly related to usability in the sens
that we want to create a consistent (convergent) experience across the
different Librem devices along with a tight integration with the Librem
services.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">What we can do now, with our current manpower and infrastructure, is
follow Debian closely - which means a general feature update of our
system not every 6-12 months, but either every day or every 2-4
years.
We can develop different/smarter infrastructure and later when that
is done we can choose a 3rd path similar to Ubuntu, of a 6-12 month
release cycle meaning that we deviate further from Debian at times.
Later, not now, with our current infrastructure. If we want such
3rd path.
And/or we can hire more people to help maintain PureOS, and later
when they are settled in and efficient with our infrastructure, we
can deviate further from Debian even before we have
different/smarter infrastructure in place, by pouring more man hours
into the things now covered mostly by Debian - including security
tracking and regression testing and bootstrapping new packages and
translating and and and... If we want to deviate more from Debian.
For now we can choose between 2 Debian tracks: Stable or Testing.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
What we need, in my opinion, is a stable core OS where we control the
release cycles of the projects we develop and contribute to (currently
GNOME)
It may not be doable with the current man power but I imagine the
following workflow :
- PureOS "red" matching Debian Experimental (or Sid?) would let the
devs work on new GNOME features.
- PureOS "orange" matching Debian Stable with an exception for the
GNOME packages being updated from PureOS "red" every official GNOME
releases (starting from RC releases), would let the design team and
other testers test the latest GNOME in the real (stable) world.
- PureOS "green" being a snapshot of PureOS "orange" every time
PureOS "orange" is defined as stable would be the official PureOS
release for the people.
This is just a proposal that may not reflect the reality of technical
issues but it is mainly to illustrate the fact that we keep control of
the testing and stability of what we develop.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Makes good sense to _develop_ such separation between "core OS" and
other parts.
It is not possible to make such distinction _today_ however: Even if our
manpower is sufficient today, we can only _today_ choose between Debian
options. We have no other options to choose from _today_.
As an example, use of flatpak for other parts is an option _later_ when
we have gained experience with how it can sustainably and reliably
integrate with whatever subset of Debian we decide is "core".
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I think this is a critical time for us in term of user experience
so we must not rush in the decisions and make sure we find a good
compromise.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Reason it is kinda urgent to reflect on this now is that _if_ we
decide to hit the break and slow down to tracking Debian stable,
then we cannot take that decision at arbitrary points during the
Debian development cycle: We need to decide before Debian releases
the next stable release, likely within few months from now, or
continue fast-paced tracking Debian testing until the next window
2-4 years from now.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
OK, I understand Jonas. It is the right time to discuss that issue and
I am sure we will find a good solution for the short and longer term!
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
We can discuss both what to do now, and what to invest resources in
developing for a potential (if research is fruitful!) near future.
We can discuss those related but different topics together IF we make it
VERY clear at all time which part we are talking about when.
- Jonas
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Pureos-project mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Pureos-project@lists.puri.sm">Pureos-project@lists.puri.sm</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.puri.sm/listinfo/pureos-project">https://lists.puri.sm/listinfo/pureos-project</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>