On Sat, Feb 13, 1999 at 03:00:40PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > If "incremental" is "new upstream releases of a bunch of packages, > and not much else", it is be definition, but if it's more than that, > it's cries of "gee, we'd better not set goals, or plan to do too much > or it'll be hamm all over again." Or we get cries of "why did you make > such a big change, now you're holding up the freeze!" What I'd like is a way to try new things without shoving them into frozen before they're ready. I think there are two problems: one is the problem of packages that get outdated, and the other is new and innovative things we want to try. In many cases, the former is solved by a simple recompile and there aren't too many complications. It would be nice if we had some way of integrating that sort of change without pulling the other along because we've reached some arbitrary date. Mike Stone
Attachment:
pgp8Q25B_wRXa.pgp
Description: PGP signature