On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 04:33:00PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Anyway, I propose that we set a date after which we will open unstable > for post-sarge d-i development, even if sarge is not released or the > t-p-u queue is still not yet set up. I think that May 1st would be a > good date. > I think these are real potential problems, but they're solvable and > other fixes to the problems I alluded to in my first paragraph (such as > making d-i use experimental or such) would probably take more work. > Also, rc3 has had a long enough soak period already with no really RC > issues, and in two weeks more it seems unlikely we'll still be finding > RC issues with it. > So I think that resuming development in unstable is worth it, but I > really want to hear the opinions of the release managers and others > first. I have utmost confidence in your judgement in this area, Joey; you are certainly in the best position to recognize the pros and cons here and to weigh them accordingly. I'm not aware of any issues that would get us in trouble release-wise besides the ones you've already identified. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature