[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Post-woody



* Adam Di Carlo 

| Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
| 
| > I just wanted to give y'all a heads up that I'd like you all to stick
| > around post woody, and keep/start working on CDs and installation stuff
| > for the next release. This doesn't change anything about debian-installer,
| > it'd just be helpful if you don't all wander off for four to six months
| > like usually happens :)
| 
| As you may or may not know, I will no longer have a "position of
| responsibility" in the installation system after Woody.  Joey Hess has
| volunteer for this position, or at least he did about 18 months ago.
| I assume he's still for it -- hopefully the folks on this list agree
| with that.

Joey has offered me the position of technical lead on d-i, since he
has too many other things taking up his time, and I have said yes.
Assuming that nobody has any big objections, that is.

| However, that is not to say I'm going to completely wander off after
| Woody -- rather, I'm expecting to continue work on the boot-floppies
| for 3.0rX point releases.  Bug fixes, internationalization, bad
| cosmetics fixes, and doc fixes only, of course.
| 
| Hopefully this arrangement will let us 
| 
|  (a) continue "maintenance mode" on the legacy boot-floppies system, and
| 
|  (b) simultaneously work out debian-installer (or pgi or whatever you
|      end up using for Woody+1) and get it in shape for *production*
|      use in, say, 6 months.
| 
| I worry whether debian-installer can have the maturity for a Woody+1
| release, supposing we were going for a shorter release cycle of 6
| months.  You have to consider that the testing period is at least 3
| months, apparently, and that would mean that we would have a
| feature-complete debian-installer in 3 months, aka 12 weeks, which I
| don't think is long enough.

I think we should move to debian-installer, even though it will take
longer time to work out.  People want to do some new development, d-i
is getting closer to working (as in actually being able to install
systems in a mostly-reliable way) by the day and I don't think pushing
boot-floppies for yet another iteration would be good at all.  IMO,
that is.

| Anyhow, Anthony, I would suggest that you put your cards on the table
| when you are expecting a feature complete new installation system
| (alpha) and ready as a release candidate for more testing (beta).

aj?

| I also think we need to seriously consider not just
| internationalization goals, but also disabled persons accessability
| (e.g., U.S. Section 508), whether X or fbdev installer is desirable,
| and what port might be included (especially if you're considering
| the hurd).

True, and I believe d-i will have the needed flexibility.

| A little planning now will make for smoother waters in the future...

very, very true.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen                                                        ,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are      : :' :
                                                                      `. `' 
                                                                        `-  


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: