> FWIW, RedHat went the other way, their first libc6 beta was missing > anything that they didn't have compiled for libc5 yet. We really > should have done the same thing and not allow packages in until they > were converted. That would have put pressure on people to do the > conversion. I think we've done a good job - we just haven't finished it off. Red Hat has an advantage in that their distribution is actually quite small - they don't have to work in all those "contrib" packages into their release. But we were in good shape to start pushing for a release back in August, ie. we've been pretty relaxed about the whole thing, whereas Red Hat has to get a product out the door in order to make money. > One big issue is boot floppies. Another is FTP install, which hasn't > worked right for years. We should be able to fix that - I'm not sure what the problems are though. > We could have our testers start testing upgrades from bo right now, > I'm sure there are still a few issues to work out. I think we should build a master list of package testers. 1500+ packages times 5 testers per package is a pretty huge list. That means each developer would have to act as a tester for 40 packages. All they have to do is submit a "Pass" report, or file additional bugs. Maybe that is way too much work? Maybe we could cut it down a bit by first withdrawing packages that shouldn't be released? Cheers, - Jim
Attachment:
pgpQxWs7hE09K.pgp
Description: PGP signature