Re: DPLs : what do you think about ...
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> - Ben Collins idea : no unstable fork before deep-freeze
FWIW, I'm against this for a reason you may not have considered. This makes
it impossible to work on making large changes to debian-only packages during
a freeze, which in turn means that they can only really be worked on about
half the time. I've in the past made big changes to versions of debhelper
and alien in unstable while a freeze was going on. If I had been hobbled by
not being able to release those changes for public testing as part of debian
until "deep freeze", those programs would not be as far along as they are
now.
This also affects other packages I've written (pdmenu, perlmoo) that
currently use the debian package as the upstream source (ie, "debian-only"
version number, though they arn't debian specific). I would have to start
releasing those non-debian so I could work on them during the freezes, and
maintaining a debian branch seperatly, which would be more administrative
work.
I agree we have a problem with the mentality of scrambling to get one more
change into your package before freeze -- does anyone else feel that slink
was stabler two weeks before freeze than it has been since? But I don't
think you have the right solution to this.
> - creation of a "Bug Group" who could manage the Bug Database without fearing
> a maintainer blame. This group should manage "important" and "critical"
> bugs not only during freeze but also while beeing in unstable... in this
> way when the freeze start, there won't be to much release-critical bugs.
> This group could also organize "bug's party" on IRC in order to
> clean up the BTS of a specific package (like it has already be done
> for ppp).
Of course, I think we should just have less onus attached to manipulating
other's bugs and doing NMU's. Ie, I think all of us should be assumed to be
in such a "bug group". Why not? We're all developers who want the best for
debian and are willing to work to attain it and that including squashing any
bug we can.
> - APT beeing finished :-)
> - Configuration management with internationalization support (I didn't speak
> of that but I wanted to...)
> - Simplification of the installation (enhanced boot disks)...
Can't agrue with these..
--
see shy jo
Reply to: