On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 01:30:16 +0000, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > I've had opinions for a while that Debian freeze policy has some flaws, > concerning not just kfreebsd but the rest of the distro. An unfortunate > consequence of having a fixed freeze date, is that many big changes > are rushed in at the last moment. > (c.f. http://www.openbsd.org/papers/asiabsdcon2009-release_engineering/mgp00005.html) > > Then during freeze, when most testing happens, we discover the trivial, > annoying bugs that accumulate to make user experience less than ideal - > but by then we can't fix them, because in the Debian BTS they only > qualify as 'important' or lower severity, and likely not eligible for > unblocks. > For what it's worth, important usability fixes can be and are routinely accepted in the early stages of the freeze. Also, announcing the freeze date in advance means maintainers knew when to start focusing on polishing/bugfixes instead of new development. Some have done that months ago. Some haven't, obviously, but they had the chance. Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature