Re: Thinking about a "jessie and a half" release
On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 07:33:38AM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 11:43:14PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> >I assume "forking" the kernel for jessie+½ as done for etch-and-half is
>> >the plan already? (forking as in using a new source package…)
>> God, no - really *not* that way at all. I'm thinking of using the
>> kernel in backports at the time we do a build/test/release
>> cycle. People using this and updating will end up following bpo for a
>> while until the Stretch release.
>
>ah, ok.
>
>then I'd like to suggest *not* to call it jessie+half, as we have used
>that term already (for etch+half) and there we had a frozen/stable kernel,
>not a moving target like bpo.
ACK - I'm not wedded to the name in the slightest. It's more a
proposal of what we're going to do.
>maybe "jessie+bpo-installer" would be a better fit?
Maybe that fits, but it's horrid name.
>and maybe, we could also do such releases more regularily (if this works
>out and turns out not to be that much extra work…)
*possibly*, yes.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
"Every time you use Tcl, God kills a kitten." -- Malcolm Ray
Reply to: