Re: Impending freeze and boot-floppies
Matt Porter <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> So how does the freeze affect us? Are we a special case?
Yes, we are special in that we can make "upstream versions" at any
point in the freeze, or even after release.
> I'm concerned since I'm spending all my boot-floppies time fixing
> issues related to the new busybox and leaving the two new feature
> items (task installer and ftp/http install) alone for the moment. I
> find it difficult to work on new features when that damn thing won't
> even run like it did when we released 2.2.1.
In retrospect, we screwed ourselves with these busybox updates. I
didn't realize how much interdependancies we had between busybox and
dbootstrap. So this is directly my fault. I'm sorry. (BTW, I was
working on the assumption that the release manager would consult our
opinion on freeze, but...).
Matt, please advise -- should we back out busybox changes or forge
ahead? I don't know how much further off we are from having a working
core system with busybox 0.33.
> I'll reiterate here that I can't believe the release manager is going to
> freeze with boot-floppies in this state. I swear I saw Adam say at one
> time that we wouldn't be ready for 2 months, but in another post he says
> "feature complete" in 2 weeks.
If I were king, I would put the freeze date at Jan 1. I believe it
will take until Jan 1 to have a "production quality" boot-floppies.
> Now who's adding the new features so things are ready in the projected
> timeframe? Nobody. I think Adam (as our temporary/interim leader) needs
> to express this to the release manager to put off the freeze. Dec 1st
> would be much better, giving us time to fix dbootstrap into running order,
> add the features that have been agreed upon (task gui, ftp/http inst, and
> dhcp support), and only spend freeze time fixing bugs.
I agree. I musta been crack-smoking if I ever said any date prior to
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>