Re: Post-woody

[Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore-devel.com>]

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.

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.

On the other hand, maybe you guys aren't planning to tighten release
cycles that hard...  Maybe you are thinking:

  May 2002 -- woody releases
  Nov 2002 -- woody+1 enters alpha
  Mar 2003 -- woody+1 enters beta
  May 2003 -- woody+1 releases 

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).

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).

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

-- 
...Adam Di Carlo..<adam@onshore-devel.com>...<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>


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