Re: "goals" for slink: FHS
Hi,
>>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> writes:
Santiago> No. What I have in mind is:
Santiago> 2. As soon as slink is *frozen* (not when slink was
Santiago> released, or we would lose a lot of time!),
Santiago> FHS-compliant packages are allowed in the new unstable,
Santiago> and we make policy that the distribution after slink
Santiago> will be FHS-compliant. I don't think it would be wise to
Santiago> switch to FHS now, because we should have used all the
Santiago> time hamm was frozen to prepare the switch and we have
Santiago> not done that. Better to do it right.
Oh. I see, you are saying we should postpose FHS compliance
until after slink. I could live with that.
We should try and change our stategy on releases (possibly to
the pool of packages idea) so that we release more often, and we do
not need to be frozen for so long.
manoj
--
Make the most of the day, by determining to spend it on two sort of
acquaintances only--those by whom something may be got, and those
from whom something may be learned. -- Colton
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: